Santosh @ Shyamlal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2403 MP

                                                                      1                               CRA-313-2021
                                           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                      CRA-313-2021
                                             (SANTOSH @ SHYAMLAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   5
                                   Jabalpur, Dated : 15-06-2021
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                          Shri Kuldeep Singh, learned counsel for the appellants.
                                          Shri Pramod Chourasiya, learned P.L. for the respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.731/2021, an application for suspension of custodial sentence passed against the appellant no.2 Parmeshwar and appellant

No.3 Bhajanlal.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 18.12.2020 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.61/2017 whereby learned Judge found appellants no. 2 and 3 guilty for the offences punishable under Section 307/34 of IPC and sentencing them R.I. for 10 years along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the trial Court without appreciating the evidence properly, wrongly convicted the appellants. He

further submitted that in the incident injured Ramprasad sustained only three injuries (two incised wound and one lacerated wound) as mentioned in the MLC report (Ex.P/23), out of which one injury was on his head and two injuries were on his cheek. Injured Ramprasad (PW/1) himself in his Court statement clearly deposed that the said injuries were caused by appellant No.1 Santosh. In the FIR lodged by injured Ramprasad also it is mentioned that appellant No.1 Santosh assaulted him by farsa (sharp object) on his head and cheek. Learned counsel further submitted that it is alleged that appellant Nos.2 & 3 assaulted Ramprasad by stick on his leg and back, but in the MLC report of injured Ramprasad it is not mentioned that he sustained any injury on his back and leg. Appellant Nos. 2 & 3 are in custody since the date of judgment Signature Not Verified SAN i.e. 18.12.2020. Hence prayed for suspension of the jail sentence and release

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Date: 2021.06.15 16:49:15 IST 2 CRA-313-2021 of the appellant Nos. 2 & 3 on bail since the hearing of this appeal will take time.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the contention of learned counsel for the appellants and the fact that the appellant No.2 & 3 are in custody since the date of judgment i.e. 18.12.2020 and according to listing

policy the hearing of this appeal is likely to take a long time, the application filed by the appellant No. 2-Parmeshwar and appellant No. 3-Bhajanlal is allowed and it is directed that the execution of the jail sentence alone passed against the appellants No. 2 and 3 shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they be released on bail upon their 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 29.11.2021 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 admission after four weeks. C.C. on payment of usual charges.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

ashish

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Date: 2021.06.15 16:49:15 IST