High CourtsDivision Bench

Dinesh And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 1 June 2026 · Citation: (2026) 06 MP CK 0292

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pranay Verma, J · Jai Kumar Pillai, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 87, 430(1) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 5(L), 6, 17 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 1537 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 485 words
1.

Heard on I.A. No.2039 of 2026, which is first application under Section 430 (1) of B.N.S.S. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant no.1- Dinesh and appellant no.2- Shiv Singh.

2.

The appellants are aggrieved of the judgment dated 4.2.2026 passed by the learned Third ASJ and SPASJ (POCSO) in SC No.12 of 2024 whereby the appellant no.1- Dinesh has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 87 of B.N.S.S. with default stipuatlion of six months R.I. The appellant no.2- Shiv Singh has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.3000/- under section 5(L)/6 r/w Section 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 with default stipulation of six months R.I.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the prosecutrix was 17 years and 9 months of age on the date of the incident. According to him in her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. she stated to be in love with appellant no.1- Dinesh. The trial court has disbelieved the case of the prosecution that she was forced by the appellants to accompany them. Infact a finding has been recorded that it is case of consent between the parties but the conviction has been recorded only on the ground that the victim was minor at the time of incident.

4.

It is further submitted that the appellants were on bail during trial and have never misused the liberty. It is submitted that there are good chances of success, hence, prayer is made to suspend the remaining jail sentence of both the appellants and release them on bail.

5.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the prayer for suspension and sentence of grant of bail.

6.

Learned counsel for the objector objects the prayer for grant of bail.

7.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to suspend the remaining part of the jail sentence of both the appellants and to release them on bail.

8.

Taking these facts into consideration and other circumstances, it is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with two solvent sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the Trial Court on 07.09.2026 and such other dates as may be fixed by the Trial Court, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon appellant no.1- Dinesh and appellant no.2- Shiv Singh shall remain suspended and them shall be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.

9.

I.A. No.2039 of 2026 is allowed & disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.