Mukesh Adiwasi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 8677 MP

                                                                      1                              CRA-4886-2019
                                           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                    CRA No. 4886 of 2019
                                              (MUKESH ADIWASI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                                   Jabalpur, Dated : 13-12-2021
                                         Shri Mukesh Kumar Pandey Advocate for the appellants.

                                         Shri Vinod Tiwari, P.L. for the respondent-State.

Appeal is already admitted for final hearing. Heard on I.A. No. 11977/2021, which is second application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No. 1- Mukesh

Adiwasi. First application was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 02.03.2021.

T h e appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.,1973 by the appellant No.3/accused against judgment dated 03.06.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Panna District- Panna (MP) in S.T.No. 77/2018, b y which the appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Sections 326/34 and 450 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for five years, three years and fine of Rs.2000/-, Rs.1000/- with default stipulation in each respectively.

Prosecution case in brief is that on 03.06.2018 at about 11.00 PM victim Santosh Yadav was in his house, at that time present appellant-accused along with other co-accused persons entered into the house of the complainant. Present appellant-accused has axe in his hand and inflicted injuries by axe to the complainant Santosh Yadav. Santosh Yadav received grievous injuries. Other co-accused also inflicted injuries to him.

Learned counsels for appellant submits that the accused/ appellant has

been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that that learned trial

Court has committed grave error in convicting and sentencing to the appellant-accused. Learned trial court did not appreciate the evidence in prospective way. Injured Santosh Yadav received grievous injuries in road accident. This fact is mentioned in his medical report. There are Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.12.13 17:53:06 IST 2 CRA-4886-2019 material contradiction and omissions in regards of participation of the present appellant-accused in the present incident. There are fair chances to succeed in the case. This appeal is of the year 2019 and final hearing of this appeal will take time. There is every possibility to succeed in this appeal. The execution of jail sentence of other co-accused have already been suspended and have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.08.2019 in Cr.A. No.

4886/2019. Appellant is in jail since 03.06.2019 and remained in jail during trial from 07.06.2018 to 30.10.2018. So, he has served almost three years of his

actual jail sentence out of 5 years. The Apex Court in the case of Saudan

Sing Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh in CRMBA No. 209280/2017 vide order dated 20.11.2018 has held that there may be even convicts in custody in cases other than life sentence cases and in those case again the broad parameter of 50 percent of the actual sentence undergone can be the basis for grant of bail. With the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the appellant prays to suspend the execution of jail sentence of the appellant and grant bail to him.

Learned P.L. for the respondent/State has opposed the application. Considering the contention of learned counsel for the parties and the facts that appellant is in jail since 03.06.2019 and remained in jail during trial from 07.06.2018 to 30.10.2018. So, he has served almost three years of his actual jail sentence out of 5 years , execution of jail sentence of other two co- accused have already been suspended and have been released on bail by this Court, this appeal is of year 2019, final disposal of this appeal will take time, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate to suspend the execution of custodial sentence awarded to the appellant and grant bail to him.

Consequently, application is allowed subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited. The execution of custodial sentence awarded to the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this Signature Not Verified SAN appeal.

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.12.13 17:53:06 IST 3 CRA-4886-2019 Appellant No.1- Mukesh Adiwasi be released from custody subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with one solvent surety in the same like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellants No.3 shall appear and mark his presence before the trial Court on 15.03.2022 and shall continue to do so on all such future dates, as may be given by the trial Court in this regard, during pendency of the matter.

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

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

MISHRA

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.12.13 17:53:06 IST