Sitaram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1697 MP

 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

                       CR. A. No. 6014 / 2019
           SITARAM AND TWO OTHERS Vs. STATE OF M. P.
                                                                        --- 1 ---
INDORE, Dated : 30/04/2021
      Hearing through video conferencing.
      Mr. Vinod Thakur, learned counsel for the applicant.
      Mr. Valmiki Sakargayein, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent - State, on advance notice.

Heard on I.A.No. 8248/2019, first application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant No.3.

The present appellant has been convicted and sentenced by learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Dr. Ambedkarnagar, Distt. Indore in S.T.No. 39/2017, vide judgment dated 29/6/2019, as under :

          Conviction                          Sentence
Section        Act          RI       Fine amount   Imprisonment in lieu of fine

307/34         IPC          10 Years 1000/-        02 months RI

Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the allegation against the appellant is that he along with other co-accused persons assaulted injured Arun and Ashok. It is submitted that although a compromise has already taken place between the parties, however, as the offence u/S. 307 of the IPC is non-compoundable, the learned trial Court has proceeded to decide the case finally and has convicted the appellant and other co-accused persons, as aforesaid. Counsel has further submitted that the appellant is in Jail since 29/6/2019 and as such until now he has already HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

CR. A. No. 6014 / 2019 SITARAM AND TWO OTHERS Vs. STATE OF M. P.

--- 2 ---

completed 2 years and 8 months. It is further submitted that even otherwise no specific overt-act has been attributed to the appellant and the main allegation of causing knife injuries is on Kamal - appellant No.2. It is further submitted that the injured witness Arun (PW 1) has also not named the present appellant in his examination-in-chief. It is further submitted that final disposal of the appeal is likely to take time.

Counsel for the respondent - State opposes the application by submitting that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the appellant on bail; hence the application filed by the appellant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and taking note of the period of incarceration and also the deposition of the injured witness Arun (PW 1) and the fact that he was hospitalised for a period of 7 days, this Court is of the considered opinion that the application for suspension of custodial sentence deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A.No. 8248/2019 is allowed and it is directed that on furnishing a personal bond by appellant No.3 Ajay s/o Vikram Bhil, in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his regular appearance before the concerned trial Court, the execution of the custodial part of the sentence imposed HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

CR. A. No. 6014 / 2019 SITARAM AND TWO OTHERS Vs. STATE OF M. P.

--- 3 ---

against the appellant shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

The appellant, after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his presence before the concerned trial Court on 28/7/2021 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard, with a further condition if the appellant has not already served out the entire sentence.

Let the matter be listed for final hearing in due course. Certified copy, as per Rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE KR

Digitally signed by KAMAL RATHORE Date: 2021.05.01 16:41:03 +05'30'