Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mukesh @ Tippu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 December, 2021
Author: Atul Sreedharan
1 CRA-8025-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 8025 of 2019
(MUKESH @ TIPPU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 08-12-2021
Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Piyush Bhatnagar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State-respondent.
Heard on I.A.No. 984/2021, which is the second application filed under
sections 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant
No.2-Ravi Balmik. The first application having been dismissed for non prosecution.
The appellant herein has been tried and convicted for the offences punishable
under sections 302/34, 120B, 201 and 25(1-B)(A) of IPC and sentenced to suffer RI
for life, RI for 5 years, RI for 5 years and RI for 2 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/-,
Rs.25,000/-, Rs.25,000/- and Rs.10,000/-, respectively, with default stipulation, as
mentioned in the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of this Court to the
findings of the learned trial Court, whereby the appellant has been convicted only on
the basis of the DNA report. The seizure witnesses have turned hostile, as so stated
by the learned counsel for the appellant. He further says that the evidence is purely
circumstantial in nature. Thereafter he further submits that the DNA test report has
absolved him, as the clothes that were seized from him which contained blood stains
on it, did not match with the DNA profile of the deceased.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State while opposing the application for
grant of bail has drawn our attention to paragraph No.83 of the learned trial Court's
judgement in which the trial Court has held the appellant guilty on the basis of the
seat cover of the Maruti Car in which the body of the deceased was transported bore
stains on which the same DNA profile as that of the deceased has been discovered.
Learned trial Court has also held that the said car was driven by the appellant and
therefore he was the part of the conspiracy.
Per contra, learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the
memorandum of the appellant-Ravi Balmik, which is Ex.P/52, in which the appellant
states that the seat cover that has already been seized by the police, has been
discarded by the appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the 27 memorandum is
Signature
SAN Not unlawful and is hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act, as a 27 memorandum must
Verified
Digitally signed by
ASTHA SEN
Date: 2021.12.09
16:21:23 IST
2 CRA-8025-2019
lead to the recovery of the article and not the admission of the article, already
recovered by the police, by the accused on the subsequent date.
Be that as it may, looking to the brief discussions herein above and without
commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed
that the appellant No.2-Ravi Balmik shall be enlarged on bail upon his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand Only)with one solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
The jail authorities shall have the appellant checked by the jail doctor to
ensure that he is not suffering from the Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19) 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.
As far as IA No.12628/2020 is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant
seeks time to argue the said appeal on behalf of the appellant No.3-Umashankar
Balmik.
List this case on 17/01/2022.
Meanwhile State is also directed to file the medical report relating to the
appellant No.3-Umashankar Balmik from the Sagar Jail.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN) (SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE JUDGE
Astha
