Dr. Sunil Kumar vs Central Bureau Of Investigation
2021 Latest Caselaw 8375 MP

      THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         CRA.6183/2021
       (Dr. Sunil Kumar and Ors. Vs. Union of India )
                                                                   1

Jabalpur, Dated : 07 / 12/ 2021
      Shri Puspendra Dubey, learned counsel for the appellants.
      Shri J.K. Jain, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the
respondent/CBI.

Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A. No.18624/2021, which is an application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of the custodial sentence passed against appellant No.1 Dr. Sunil Kumar, appellant No.2 P.K. Saxena and appellant No.3 P.M.S. Kumar.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 11.10.2021 passed by Special Judge, CBI, Bhopal in Special Case No. 01/2013, whereby learned Special Judge found the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 13(1)(D) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the trial court itself found that all the loan amount was recovered. There is no evidence on record to show that appellants committed any illegality or irregularity during their tenure regarding loan transactions even then learned trial court without appreciating the evidence properly, wrongly convicted the appellants for the aforesaid offences. There are several omissions and contradictions in the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Hence prayed for suspension of the jail sentence and release of the appellants on bail since the hearing of this appeal will take time.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - CBI opposed the prayer and submitted that the guilt of the appellants THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA.6183/2021 (Dr. Sunil Kumar and Ors. Vs. Union of India )

were proved beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants.

This Court has considered the respective submissions made by the parties and perused the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court. The maximum sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant is only three years. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai Vs. State of Gujrat, ( 1999) 4 SCC 421 has held that when a person is convicted and sentenced to a short term imprisonment, the normal rule is that when his appeal is pending, the sentence should be suspended by enlarging appellant on bail and rejection can only be by way of exception. Apex Court in the case of C. Sareen v. CBI, Chandigarh, (2001) 6 SCC 584 held that no doubt when the appellate Court admits the appeal filed in challenge of the conviction and sentence for the offence under the PC Act, the superior court should normally suspend the sentence of imprisonment until disposal of the appeal, because refusal thereof would render the very appeal otiose unless such appeal could be heard soon after the filing of the appeal. Apex Court in the case of N. Ramamurthy Vs. State of Central Bureau Of Investigation, A.C.B., Bengaluru, 2019 Cri.L.J. 2929 also held that in cases where an appeal could not be heard soon after the filing of the appeal, the superior Court should normally suspend the sentence of imprisonment until disposal of the appeal. So looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the term of imprisonment awarded, the conduct of appellants when on bail during the trial, and the fact that according to listing policy the hearing of this appeal will take time, the application is allowed and it is directed that the execution of the jail sentence alone passed against the THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA.6183/2021 (Dr. Sunil Kumar and Ors. Vs. Union of India )

appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) each with one surety each in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 21/03/2022 and on such further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.

List the matter for final hearing in due course. C.C. as per rules.

                                                           (Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
sarathe                                                           Judge




Digitally signed by
NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Date: 2021.12.08
10:27:43 +05'30'