Rakesh Prasad Kewat vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

On account of prevailing conditions worldwide brought about by the COVID-19 virus, the appeal has been heard through video conferencing in order to maintain social distancing. The necessary parties have effectively been represented by their respective counsel via video conferencing.

Heard on the question of admission as well as on I.A. No. 3725/2020, which is an application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of sentence on behalf of the appellant.

The appellant stands convicted and sentenced by the trial Court as under :-

CONVICTION

SENTENC

SECTION

ACT

IMPRISONMENT

FINE, IF DEPOSITED DETAILS

IMPRISONMENT IN LIEU OF FINE

450

I.P.C, Act

R.I. for 1 year

Rs. 1000/-

Addl. R.I. for 1 month

376(1)

I.P.C, Act

R.I. for 8 years

Rs.5000/-

Addl. R.I. for 5 months

It is stated that the appellant is in jail since 16.12.2016.

As per the prosecution story, on 14.12.2015, when the prosecutrix (PW-1) was in her old house situated at Village Dhurital and when she went outside of house for eating guava, it is alleged that the appellant has caught hold of her and thrown her on the surface and committed rape with her. At that time, the grand father of the prosecutrix (PW-4) was coming and seeing him the appellant ran away. The report was lodged after 24 hours.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as regard in para-15 of the judgment, the age of the prosecutrix is between 17-18 years and in such matters, the age variance is about two years either side and therefore, the benefit should be given to the accused. It is further stated that in the K.G. Class certificate, the date of birth of the prosecutrix was recorded as 25.10.1998. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the testimony of the prosecutrix and other witnesses are not supported by the medical evidence. He has referred to the testimony of PW-5 i.e. Dr. Deeksha Pandey wherein she has not found any external or internal injury on the person of the prosecutrix. As per the said report, the hymen of the prosecutrix was found old ruptured. It is also stated that the accused is in jail for last more than three and a half years since 16.12.2016 and therefore, he shall be released on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the age of the prosecutrix has been found to be 17-18 years and also the fact that the testimony of the prosecutrix and other witnesses are not supported by the medical evidence of PW-5- Dr. Deeksha Pandey, I am of the view that the jail sentence of appellant- namely Rakesh Prasad Kewat shall remain suspended and he shall be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, the I.A. No. 3725/2020 stands allowed and disposed of.

It is directed that the execution of the jail sentence of the appellant namely- Rakesh Prasad Kewat shall remain suspended during pendency of the present appeal and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

The appellant- Rakesh Prasad Kewat shall now appear before the Registry of this Court on 24.09.2020, and on such other dates which normally will not be less than the period of eight months as may be directed to them in this regard till final disposal of this appeal.

The prison authorities are also requested to ensure compliance with the order passed by the Supreme Court IN RE: CONTAGION OF COVID- 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU - W.P. (C) No.1/2020 and ensure that the appellant is examined by the jail doctor before his release. If the appellant shows symptoms of COVID-19, the doctor shall forthwith direct him to be produced before the appropriate hospital designated for the detection and treatment of COVID-19 patients. If the doctor is of the opinion that the appellant is not affected with the virus, the jail authorities shall ensure his transportation from the jail till his place of residence.

A typed copy of this order be forwarded to the Office of the Advocate General and also to Shri Shivam Hazare, learned Panel Lawyer, on their respective e-mail addresses. The Office is also directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned Court below.

List for final hearing in due course.

C.c. as per rules.