Pujari Hanuman Das vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 8392 MP

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.8404/2019 (Pujari Hanuman Das Vs. The State of M.P.)

Gwalior Bench : Dated : 07.12.2021

Shri R.K.Shrivastav, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Brij Mohan Shrivastav, learned Public Prosecutor for the

State.

Heard on I.A.No.31552/2021, third application under Section

389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence filed in respect of

appellant.

This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 30.08.2019

passed in S.T.No.1500220/2016 by the II Additional Sessions Judge,

Bhind, whereby the appellant -Pujari Hanumandas has been convicted

under Sections 467 read with Section 120 B of IPC and Section 468 of

IPC and Section 471 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI ten years

with fine of Rs.5000/- and to undergo RI three years and to undergo RI

ten years with fine of Rs.5000/- respectively with default stipulations.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that

the appellant is suffering incarceration since 15.09.2016 and suffered

more than 5 years' incarceration, out of total 10 years' conviction and

jail sentence. It is further submitted that the appellant suffered

incarceration since year 2007 for offence under Section 302 of IPC and

effectively he suffered around 14 years' incarceration and in the said

case under Section 302 of IPC (vide Annexure P/2) suspension

application was allowed vide order dated 22.07.2020 in Criminal

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.8404/2019 (Pujari Hanuman Das Vs. The State of M.P.)

Appeal No.285/2010. In the present case, he suffered more than 5

years' incarceration. Hearing of this appeal shall take some time.

Appellant intends to perform some community service to purge himself

out of the guilt felt by the appellant and to serve national/

environmental/social cause. Under these circumstances, he prayed for

suspension of the jail sentence of the appellant and grant bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the prayer and

prayed for its dismissal.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and record perused.

Considering the period of custody in total, the appellant may be

enlarged on bail and sentence may be suspended because hearing of

this appeal will take time, hence, I.A. No.31552/2021 is allowed and it

is ordered that on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees

Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to

the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, appellant's jail sentence

shall remain suspended till disposal of this appeal and he be released

on bail. The appellant is further directed to remain present before the

Registry of this Court on 04.03.2022 and, thereafter, on such

subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry.

,rn~ }kjk ;g Hkh funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkosnd 10 ikS/kksa dk ¼Qy

nsus okys isM+ vFkok [email protected]½ jksi.k djsxk rFkk mls vius vkl iMksl esa

isM+ksa dh lqj{kk ds fy, ckM+ yxkus dh O;oLFkk djuh gksxh rkfd ikS/ks lqjf{kr jg

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.8404/2019 (Pujari Hanuman Das Vs. The State of M.P.)

ldsA vkosnd dk ;g drZO; gS fd u dsoy ikS/kksa dks yxk;k tk,s] cfYd mUgsa

iks"k.k Hkh fn;k tk,A ^^o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk] o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gS A^^

vkosnd fo'ks"kr% 6&8 QhV ÅWps ikS/[email protected]+ksa dks 3&4 QhV xM~<k djds

yxk;sxk rkfd os 'kh?kz gh iw.kZ fodflr gks ldsaA vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djus ds

fy,] vkosnd dks fjgk fd;s tkus dh fnukad ls 30 fnuksa ds Hkhrj laacaf/kr fopkj.k

U;k;ky; ds le{k o`{kksa[email protected]/kksa ds jksi.k ds lHkh QksVks çLrqr djus gksxsaA rRi'pkr~]

fopkj.k ds lekiu rd gj rhu eghus esa vkosnd ds }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds

le{k izxfr fjiksVZ çLrqr dh tk,xh A

o`{kksa dh çxfr ij fuxjkuh j[kuk vkosnd dk drZO; gS D;ksafd i;kZoj.k

{kj.k ds dkj.k ekuo vfLrRo nkao ij gS vkSj U;k;ky; vuqikyu ds ckjs esa

vkosnd }kjk fn[kkbZ xbZ fdlh Hkh ykijokgh dks utj vankt ugh dj ldrk gSA

blfy, vkosnd dks isM+ksa dh çxfr vkSj vkosnd }kjk vuqikyu ds laca/k esa ,d

fjiksVZ çLrqr djus ds fy, funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa vkosnd }kjk fd;s x;s

vuqikyu dh ,d la{kfIr fjiskVZ fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k izR;sd rhu ekg esa

¼vxys N% eghuksa ds fy,½ j[kh tk;sxh fd **funsZ'k** 'kh"kZd ds varxZr j[kk tk,xkA

o`{kkjksi.k esa ;k isM+ksa dh ns[kHkky esa vkosnd dh vksj ls dh xbZ dksbZ Hkh

pwd vkosnd dks tekur dk ykHk ysus ls oafpr dj ldrh gSA

vkosnd dks viuh ilan ds LFkku ij bu ikS/[email protected] dks jksius dh Lora=rk

gksxh] ;fn og bu jksis x;s isMksa dh Vªh xkMZ ;k ck<+ yxkdj j{kk djuk pkgrk gS]

vU;Fkk vkosnd dks o`{kksa ds jksi.k ds fy, rFkk muds lqj{kk mik;ksa ds fy,

vko';d [kpsZ ogu djuk gksxsaA

bl U;k;ky; }kjk ;g funsZ'k ,d ijh{k.k izdj.k ds rkSj ij fn,

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.8404/2019 (Pujari Hanuman Das Vs. The State of M.P.)

x, gSa rkfd fgalk vkSj cqjkbZ ds fopkj dk izfrdkj] l`tu ,oa izd`fr ds

lkFk ,dkdkj gksus ds ek/;e ls lkeaktL; LFkkfir fd;k tk ldsA orZeku

esa ekuo vfLrRo ds vko';d vax ds :i esa n;k] lsok] izse ,oa d:a.kk dh

izd`fr dks fodflr djus dh vko';drk gS D;ksafd ;g ekuo thou dh

ewyHkwr izo`fr;ka gSa vkSj ekuo vfLrRo dks cuk, j[kus ds fy, budk

iquthZfor gksuk vko';d gSA

;g funsZ'k vkosnd ds }kjk Lor% O;Dr dh xbZ lkeqnkf;d lsok dh

bPNk ds dkj.k fn;k x;k gS tks LoSfPNd gSA

^^;g iz;kl dsoy ,d o`{k ds jksi.k dk iz'u u gksdj cfYd ,d fopkj ds

vadqj.k dk gSA^^

It is expected from the appellant that he shall submit

photographs by downloading the mobile application (App)

prepared at the instance of High Court for monitoring the

plantation though satellite/Geo-tagging.

I.A.No.31552/2021 stands allowed and disposed of.

List the case in due course.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for

compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                                                (Anand Pathak)
AK/-                                                                Judge
       ANAND KUMAR
       2021.12.07
       18:02:06 +05'30'