Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deepak Dabi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 April, 2024
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 2593 of 2024
(DEEPAK DABI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 24-04-2024
Shri Virendra Kumar S.Parihar - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Gaurav Singh Chouhan - Dy. Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
Shri Mahendra Solanki - Advocate for the respondent.
Heard on I.A.No.3185/2024, which is the first application under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the sole appellant - Deepak Dabi S/o Badrilal Dabi.
2 . Learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 363,366, 376(2)(n) of the IPC and 5 (L)/6 of the POCSO Act,2012 and sentenced him to undergo 5 years RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-, 20 years R I with fine of Rs.2,000/- respectively with default stipulations, vide its judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.02.2024 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO) Act,2012 Dewas in Sessions Case No.125/2022.
3. The law enforcement agency came into motion when unlce of the prosecutrix intimated to the Police Station Civil Lines, Dewas on 19.08.2022 that daughter of his brother aged about 17 years old was in their lawful custody as the father of the victim has died in the year 2005 and prosecutrix left the home on 05.07.2022 and could not be traced. Thereafter, a missing report No.79/2022 was registered and Crime No.369/2022 was also registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Dewas. Victim PW-1 was recovered on 21.08.2022. Her statements under Section 161 & 164 of the Cr.P.C was recorded. She was Signature Not Verified Signed by: AKANKSHA LAHORIYA Signing time: 25-04-2024 17:16:04 2 medically examined and completing the investigation final report was submitted to Special Court and appellant/accused tried after recording the evidence. Appellant/accused was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C where appellant/accused preferred the defence that the marriage was solemnized between prosecutrix and appellant/accused in the presence of family members of both the parties. Father of prosecutrix has died and her mother has re- married and uncle of the prosecutrix were making pressure to relinquish their right in the property of her father. When prosecutrix denied to relinquish victims right have been a false case has been lodged. After appreciating the evidence trial Court convicted the appellant/accused.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has preferred this application on the ground that prosecution and appellant are husband and wife. Father of the prosecutrix has died and her mother has re-married.
5. The prosecutrix herself appeared before the Court, she has submitted her affidavit also in favour of the appellant/accused. Final disposal of this appeal will take considerable time. Therefore, in such circumstances, it is prayed that the jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
6 . P e r contra, learned Dy. Government Advocate for the respondent/State has opposed the application referring to para 21, 23, 33, 43 and 48 of the judgment and also argued that offence is heinous in naute and looking to the entire role of the appellant/accused and sentence awarded to the period of custody it is not a fit case of enlarging the appellant/accused on bail by suspending his jail sentence. Trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant by passing a judicious order on the basis of evidence available on record. Hence, the appellant is not entitled to be released on bail.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: AKANKSHA LAHORIYA Signing time: 25-04-2024 17:16:04 37. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8 . Looking to the facts and circumstances and considering paras 2,3,7,8,9 and 10 of the prosecutrix PW-1 and fact that final disposal of this appeal will take considerable time, we deem it fit to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant, without going to the merits of the case..
9. Accordingly, I.A.No.3185/2024 is allowed and it is directed that subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lac only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, the execution of substantial jail sentence of the appellant - Deepak Dabi S/o Badrilal Dabi shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.
9. The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before the trial Court on 14/10/2024 and thereafter on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this behalf.
10. List the case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
akanksha
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AKANKSHA
LAHORIYA
Signing time: 25-04-2024
17:16:04