Rahul Nagar And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Government Advocate for the respondent/State. I.A. No.12702 of 2022 an application under Section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellants - Rahul Nagar and Nagendra Nagar is taken up.

The appellants have been convicted under Section 366 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 05 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants urged that as per prosecution story, on 03.06.2017 at around 8.30 p.m. both the appellants allegedly forcibly taken the victim with them from Maihar to a station near Mumbai. They put up wet handkerchief with chloroform in order to take the victim with them. During this period when victim is with them the appellants allegedly sexually assaulted her. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that victim herself came back on 05.06.2017 to her house. She along with her father reported the incident to the local Police Station on 09.06.2017. It is unbelievable that between 03.06.2017 (date when appellants allegedly taken her away) to 05.06.2017 the victim travelled to Mumbai and came back to Maihar. In medical report no findings were given establishing commission of rape or sexual assault. The FSL report is negative. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C did not depose anything about commission of rape. The victim was subjected to cross-examination on the basis of her statement under Section 164. In view of clear omission /contradiction, her Court statement is not trustworthy and without there being any corroboration, the Court below has committed an error in convicting the appellants.

Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State has opposed the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant on the strength of written objections.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and the objection.

Considering the aforesaid arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellants.

Accordingly, I.A. No.12702 of 2022 is allowed.

Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the remaining jail sentence of the appellants are hereby suspended and it is directed that the appellants be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with a further direction to appear before the trial court Amarpatan, District Satna on 21.12.2022 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

C.C. as per rules.