Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Durgesh Vanshkar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 September, 2023

Author: Sujoy Paul

Bench: Sujoy Paul

                                                                1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                         CRA No. 225 of 2014
                                             (DURGESH VANSHKAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 22-09-2023
                                   Ms. Durgesh Gupta - Advocate for the appellant.

                                   Shri Ritwik Parashar - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.18802/2023, which is the fifth application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of sole appellant Durgesh Vanshkar.

2. First, second and third bail applications filed on behalf of appellant were dismissed on merit by this Court vide orders dated 15/04/2014, 21/06/2016 and 13/12/2017 and fourth application for temporary suspension of sentence and grant of bail was allowed by this Court vide order dated 16/01/2018 and jail sentence of appellant was suspended for a period of one week.

3. The appellant has filed this Criminal Appeal being aggrieved with the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 06/01/2014 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.215/2013, whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 376(D), 506 (Part-II) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him under Section 376(D) of the IPC, which is graver one, to undergo R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.15,000/- with default clause and also under Section 506 (Part-II) of the IPC to undergo R.I. for one year.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the medical examination no external injury was found on the body of prosecutrix. The FIR was lodged with a delay of 24 hours. Learned counsel also drew the attention of Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 26-09-2023 10:16:02 2 this Court towards Para-3 of the statement of prosecutrix (PW-2) and also Para-3 & 4 of statement of C.P. Mishra, Sub-Inspector (PW-9). He further submits that the age of appellant was 20 years at the time of incident and he has no criminal past. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant is in custody since the date of arrest i.e. 11/06/2013, thereby he is in incarceration for more than ten years. This Appeal is of the year 2014 and is not likely to come up for hearing in near future. Under these circumstances learned counsel prays for suspension of remaining jail sentence of the appellant.

5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for suspension of remaining jail sentence of the appellant and submits that the prosecutrix (PW-2) has supported the prosecution case before the trial Court. He further submits that in the medical examination of prosecutrix, external injury was found. FSL report also supports the case of the prosecution. Learned counsel further submitted that the trial Court has passed the judgment after due appreciation of evidence, that came on record and has rightly held the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offences. Hence, prays for dismissal of the application.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.

7. FSL report (Ex.P-22) as well as statement of Dr. Shobhna Choukse (PW-6) supports the statement of victim (PW-2). The application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of co-accused Hariom Ahirwar in Cr.A.No.394/2014 against whom the allegations are similar in nature, has been dismissed on merit vide order dated 18/07/2022 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

8. Considering the above factual matrix of the case, including overall Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 26-09-2023 10:16:02 3 evidence available on record, coupled with the fact that earlier three applications filed by appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail have already been dismissed on merit. Except the period of custody there is no material change in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, we are of the considered view that it is not a fit case to suspend the remaining jail sentence of appellant.

9. Accordingly, I.A.No.18802/2023 is hereby dismissed.

10. Looking to the period of custody of appellant, office is directed to list the case for final hearing in the week commencing 20/11/2023.

                                (SUJOY PAUL)                                (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
                                   JUDGE                                             JUDGE

                           as




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANURAG SONI
Signing time: 26-09-2023
10:16:02