Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 268 MP
Judgement Date : 26 February, 2021
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Criminal Appeal No.662/2021
( Manish Kumar Vs. State of M.P.)
Indore, Dated:26/2/2021
Heard through video conferencing.
Shri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ayushman Choudhary, learned counsel for the
respondent/State.
Reply filed by the respondent is taken on record.
Since the record is received from the Court below the present
appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A.No.1015/2021 which is an application for
suspension of sentence of the appellant filed under Section 389 of the
Cr.P.C.
The appellant has been convicted and sentenced by the learned
first Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge Vyapam Indore vide
order dated 22.1.2021 passed in S.T.No.65/2019 which is as under:-
Conviction Sentence
419 IPC 1 years R.I - -
420 IPC 5 years R.I 200/- 1 months
additional S.I
467 IPC 5 years R.I 500/- 1 month
additional
S.I.
468 IPC 3 years R.I 200/- 1 months
additional S.I
471 IPC 1 years R.I 100/- 15 days
additional
R.I
3(d)(2) r/w 4 M.P.
Recognised
Examination
Act 1937
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that
the allegation against the present appellant is that he appeared in the
PMT Examination in place of one Sant Kumar Trivedia.
Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the aforesaid Sant
Kumar Trivedia has been tried in a separate trial and has already been
acquitted by the trial Court which is also mentioned in the impugned
judgment itself in paragraph 61.
Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that an offence
under Section 419 of IPC i.e, impersonation would be made out against
the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since
22.1.2021 and prior to that he has already spent around two months in
jail and that the appellant has also not misused the liberty while he was
on bail. It is also submitted that the final conclusion of the appeal is
likely to take sufficiently long time, therefore, the suspension
application be allowed.
Counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer for grant
of suspension of sentence to the appellant.
Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the
record of the lower Court and taking note of the fact that the appellant is
in jail since 22.1.2021 and earlier also he has already spent around two
months in jail and the fact that the person Sant kumar for whom the
present appellant had appeared in the PMT Examination has already
been acquitted and the appeal is not likely to be heard at an early date,
this Court finds it expedient to allow the suspension application. The
prayer for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is directed that on
furnishing bail bond to the tune of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five
thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on
26/4/2021 and on subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry, the
appellant be released on bail and the substantive sentence shall remain
suspended pending this appeal.
IA No.1015/2021 stands allowed and disposed off.
c.c as per rules.
(Subodh Abhyankar) Judge Digitally signed by REENA PARTHO
das SARKAR Date: 2021.02.27 18:03:25 +05'30'
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!