Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mangal @ Manish vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 November, 2021
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA -6231-2021 Mangal @ Manish Vs. State of M.P. Gwalior, Dated : 16/11/2021 Shri Prashant Sharma, Counsel for appellant. Shri Lokendra Shrivastava, Counsel for State. Heard on I.A. No.30465/2021, this is first application under Section 389 (1) of CrPC for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant- Mangal @ Manish.
The appellant has been convicted for the following offences :
Conviction U/s Sentence Fine Default (in lieu of fine) 376 (1) read with 10 years RI 5,000/- 6 months RI Section 120-B of IPC It is submitted by Counsel for the appellant that according to the prosecution case also the appellant had not committed rape. The only allegation is that the prosecutrix who was found to be more than 18 years of age eloped with the co-accused who is being tried as a juvenile before the J.J. Board. From Gwalior they went to Morena bus stand but they did not get the bus and they came back to Gwalior. It is alleged that appellant took them on his motor cycle to his bakery, where after leaving the prosecutrix and co-accused in his bakery, he locked the door from the outside. It is alleged that thereafter the prosecutrix was raped by the co-
accused. By referring to the spot map (Exhibit P-4), it is submitted by Counsel for appellant that spot map shows that the place of incident is Tansen ka Makbara and not Mangal Bakery.
The application is opposed by Counsel for the State. It is submitted that spot map (Exhibit P-4) was prepared on the instructions THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA -6231-2021 Mangal @ Manish Vs. State of M.P. given by mother of prosecutrix. Even the mother of prosecutrix has alleged that the prosecutrix and co-accused went to Bhind from where she got a telephonic call from her Jethani.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties. So far as incorrect spot map is concerned, it was prepared by the Investigating Officer on instructions of mother of prosecutrix. It is clear case of faulty investigation. The investigating officer should have prepared the spot map on the basis of information given by the prosecutrix.
Be that whatever it may.
Merely because the place of incident has been mentioned in the spot map as Tansen Ka Makbara, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is not sufficient to disbelieve the evidence of prosecutrix (PW-1) as the spot map was not prepared on the information given by the prosecutrix. There are specific allegations against the appellant. According to the prosecution case, he not only took the prosecution and co-accused to the bakery but also locked them inside it. The appellant has been convicted under Section 376 (1) read with Section 120-B of IPC.
Considering the allegations made against the appellant, no case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail is made out.
Accordingly, I.A. No.30465/2021 fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Aman AMAN TIWARI 2021.11.16 17:56:37 +05'30'