Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 April, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-7609-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 7609 of 2022
(RAJESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS ) Dated : 08-04-2025 Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Shah - Advocate for appellant. Mr. Ved Prakash Tiwari - Government Advocate for State. Mr. Tiwari prays for adoption of earlier objection. I.A. No.16178 of 2024 is the second application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant. Earlier application of the appellant was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Vide impugned judgment dated 28.06.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Exclusive Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Betul in SCATR No.136 of 2020, appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years with fine of Rs.2,000/-, under Section 366-ka of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 07 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 372 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 07 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- and under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 09-04-2025 18:55:34 2 CRA-7609-2022 read with Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 05 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent. The consensual relationship has been converted into that of rape. Age of the prosecutrix is doubtful. It is submitted that the evidence of the father of the prosecutrix, that of the prosecutrix and school teacher (PW-4) leaves no iota of doubt that there is no documentary evidence to support the case of the prosecutrix that she was minor. There are good changes of success in appeal. Hence, prayer is made to suspend execution of remaining part of the jail sentence of the appellant and to release him on bail.
Learned Government Advocate for the State opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant and prays for dismissal of application.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record so also taking into consideration the overall facts & circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that present is fit case to suspend execution of remaining part of jail sentence of the appellant and to release him on bail.
I.A.No.16178 of 2024 is accordingly allowed.
It is directed that on depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on 26.6.2025 and on all subsequent dates as may be fixed by the concerned Court, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he be released on bail till final disposal of this Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 09-04-2025 18:55:34 3 CRA-7609-2022 appeal.
I.A.No.16178 of 2024 stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
julie
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JULIE SINGH
Signing time: 09-04-2025
18:55:34