Khachhuram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1566 MP

                                         1




                     The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                CRA-1019-2014
                    (KHACHHURAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

3
                    24-04-2021
Gwalior, Dated :
Heard through Video Conferencing.
        Shri Sunil Kumar Dubey, Advocate for the appellant.
        Shri MPS Raghuwanshi, Additional Advocate General for the
respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.8891/2021 filed by the appellant / accused under section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of his jail sentence awarded by the Court of Additional Session Judge, Senvda, District Datia (MP) in S.T.No.117/12 vide its judgment dated 30.10.2013 convicting the appellant / accused under sections 302 and 201 of the IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for life with fine of Rs.1000/- and RI for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/- respectively, with default stipulation clause as mentioned in the impugned judgment.

The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that the prosecution originally set the case that the appellant/ accused committed murder of his own wife and set up his two sons namely Ravi, aged 14 years and Kamalkishore, aged 10 years, as eye witnesses. But when these two eye witnesses appeared in the Court, they denied having seen any such incident and were declared hostile. Learned counsel further contended that when the prosecution originally set up its case with the aid of eye witnesses, it cannot later seek to raise presumption under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. Learned counsel further submitted that the findings recorded by learned trial court in para 10 of the impugned judgment that since the feet of the deceased were touching the ground while the dead body was found hanging on Mayar of Kachcha hut, it has to be case of first strangulating her and then hanging her body. This conclusion is merely based on presumption and does not have any logic. The appellant is an old person of 68 years and has completed incarceration of almost 10 years in

the jail. The disposal of the appeal will take long time. There is no likelihood of his absconding. Hence, prayer is made for suspension of his jail sentence and grant of bail.

Learned Additional Advocate General opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the other facts and circumstances of the case, this application (I.A.No.8891/2021) is allowed. It is ordered that subject to payment of fine amount, if not already deposited, the execution of jail sentence of appellant Khachhuram shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial court on 15.11.2021 and thereafter on all other such subsequent dates as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard.

In case, the appellant is found absent on any date fixed by the trial court then the said court shall be free to issue and execute warrant of arrest without referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.

The jail authorities shall have the appellant checked by the jail doctor to ensure that he is not suffering from the corona-virus and if he is, he shall be sent to the nearest hospital designated by the State for treatment. If not, he shall be transported to his place of residence by the jail authorities.

CC as per rules.

      (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)                                         (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
       CHIEF JUSTICE                                                JUDGE


JP




     Digitally signed by
     CHRISTOPHER PHILIP
     Date: 2021.04.24 21:54:02
     +05'30'