AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Virender Singh J
I.A. No.6334/2020 is an application for urgent hearing during the lockdown period.
On due consideration of the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
I.A. No.2206/2020 is taken up.
This is the second application of applicant - Prahlad Bavri for suspension of custodial sentence filed under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C.
His first application was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 08.12.2017.
The applicant has been convicted under Sections 368, 370, 370-A and 372 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo 3, 5, 5 & 7 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 1+3+3+3,000/- with default stipulations respectively.
According to the prosecution case, the minor prosecutrix was in quest of a job to help her parents in penury. Pretending that she will arrange a decent job for her, in connivance with the other co-accused persons, Najma enticed her to leave her home. She first took her to the house of co-accused Sapna, where Prakash ruined her chastity. Shyamlal followed Prakash and he also exploited her physically. Poonam @ Purnima was also with the crooks. After a few days, they all Shyamlal, Prakash, Sapna, Najma and Poonam @ Purnima sold her for Rs.80,000/- to 8-10 people, who had come from Nimbahera, Rajasthan. They kept her in the house of Prahlad (applicant) in Nimbahera. In the house of Prahlad, co-accused Roshan raped her. After 2-3 days, Prakash and Poonam took her back to the house of Sapna in Mandsaur. Finding an opportunity, one day she escaped and reached to her parents and narrated the horrific experiences she went through.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he was one of the men, who had come from Nimbahera, Rajasthan, purchased the prosecutrix, taken her with them and kept in his house, where co-accused Roshan raped her.
The suspension is pleaded principally on the ground of period of custody. A certificate of period of custody dated 17. 02.2020 issued by the Superintendent of District Jail, Mandsaur has been referred to by the learned Counsel. This certificate shows that the actual period of incarceration of the petitioner is 3 years, 6 months and 14 days till the date of issuance of the certificate and 4 years 2 months and 4 days as on today. With remission, the period goes up to 4 years, 10 months and 26 days up to the date of issuance of the certificate and more than five years as on today.
It is further pointed out that the applicant has served out the sentences awarded for the offences punishable under Sections 368, 370, 370-A IPC as for those offences, he has been awarded five years or less than five years imprisonments and the only remaining sentence is under Section 372 IPC.
The learned Counsel contended that still there is no hope of early hearing of the appeal and the applicant has a good case to argue, therefore, he be granted suspension.
The prosecution has opposed the prayer.
Taking the period of custody into consideration, coupled with the allegation made against the applicant and also the act attributed to him, we deem it appropriate to allow the application. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I.A. No.2206 of 2020 is allowed. The substantive jail sentence of applicant--Prahlad Bavri S/o Babulal Bavri suspended subject to his depositing the fine amount and furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before this Court/Registry on 10th March, 2021 and on all other subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry in this behalf during the pendency of this appeal.
This is an admitted appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.