Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dashrath vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2021
Author: Vivek Rusia
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
CR. A. No. 7359 / 2018
DASHRATH Vs. STATE OF M.P.
--- 1 ---
INDORE, Dated : 28/05/2021
Heard through video conferencing.
Mr. Bhaskar Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Bharti Lakkad, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent - State.
Heard on I.A. No. 4470/2021, which is Fourth application
under Section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail
sentence filed on behalf of the appellant Dashrath s/o Bathu
Bhilala. The earlier three applications were dismissed as
withdrawn after arguments at length.
This is an appeal filed u/S. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure 1973 against the judgment dated 5/9/2018 by which
the appellant has been convicted as under :
Conviction Sentence
Section Act RI Fine amount Imprisonment in lieu of fine
304 Part 2 IPC 10 Years 1000 6 months RI
As per prosecution story, complainant Kumar s/o Jamsingh
Bhilala gave information to the Police Station Bhagwanpura on
27/9/2015 that his daughter Ku. Resla is lying in the agriculture
field belonging to the appellant . The police registered marg
85/15 and reached to the spot and found that Ku. Resla died due
to electrocution. Further enquiry has revealed that this appellant
is one of the owners of the field who has erected the electricity
wires illegally over the field to save crops from the animals.
Police have made him accused u/S. 304 IPC and filed charge
sheet. The appellant denied charges and the prosecution
examined as many as 16 witnesses to prove the charges. In
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
CR. A. No. 7359 / 2018
DASHRATH Vs. STATE OF M.P.
--- 2 ---
defence appellant did not examine any witness. Vide judgment
dated 5/9/2018 he has been convicted and sentenced to 10 years.
Mr. Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant has wrongly been convicted u/S. 304 Part II. At the
most it is a case of 304-A in which the maximum sentence is 2
years which the appellant has already undergone, therefore, he
has filed the present application. He is in custody for more than
2½ years. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment delivered
by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of 2003 (2)
MPWN 67 Abid Hussain Vs. The State of MP, in which in
similar facts and circumstances it is held that in case of death due
to electrocution the offence at the most 304-A I.P.C. is made out.
The prayer for suspension is opposed by the learned panel
lawyer.
Keeping in view the judgment passed by the coordinate
Bench in the case of Abid Hussain (supra) and the fact that in
this case also death took place due to electrocution from the
wires lying in the agriculture field. Prima facie there was no
intention to commit murder. The electricity wires were spread in
order to protect the crops from the animals. There is no
likelihood of a final hearing of the appeal in near future.
Appellant is not a habitual offender. He is an agriculturist and
joint owner of the land.
Accordingly, I.A.No.4470/2021 is allowed and it is
directed that subject to deposit fine amount and on furnishing
personal bond by the appellant Dashrath in the sum of Rs.
40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with a solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
CR. A. No. 7359 / 2018
DASHRATH Vs. STATE OF M.P.
--- 3 ---
his appearance before the Court, the execution of custodial part
of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of
this appeal. The appellant after being enlarged on bail, shall mark
his present before the registry of this Court on 20/1/2022 and on
all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by the
Registry.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
VACATION JUDGE
KR
Digitally signed by KAMAL RATHORE
Date: 2021.05.31 15:28:53 +05'30'
