Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sumer Singh Rajpoot vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 November, 2021
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRR.2350/2021
(Sumer Singh Rajpoot and Ors. Vs. State of M.P.)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 15 / 11 / 2021
Shri Satyam Agrawal, counsel for the applicants.
Shri Devendra Shukla, P.L. for the respondent / State.
Record has been received.
Heard on the question of admission.
Revision seems to be arguable hence it is admitted for final
hearing.
Also heard on IA No. 17282/2021, which is an application for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant
No.1 Sumer Singh Rajpoot, applicant No.2 Vishwanath @ Vishnu,
applicant No.3 Manohar Singh Rajpoot, applicant No.4 Charansingh
Rajpoot and applicant No.5 Chandan Singh Rajpoot.
This revision has been filed against the judgment dated
17.09.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Budni, Distt. Sehore,
(M.P.) in Cri. Appeal No.29/2020 whereby learned ASJ affirmed the
judgement of conviction dated 23.12.2019 passed by learned JMFC,
Budni, District Sehore in RCT. No.194/2012 whereby learned JMFC
found applicant No.1 Sumer Singh Rajpoot, applicant No.2 Vishwanath
@ Vishnu, applicant No.3 Manohar Singh Rajpoot, applicant No.4
Charansingh Rajpoot and applicant No.5 Chandan Singh Rajpoot guilty
and convicted and sentenced them as under :-
Sections (in Sentence Fine Default
IPC) stipulation
325 (2 counts) three years R.I. 400/- Six months R.I.
325/34 three years R.I. 500/- Six months R.I.
323/34 one years R.I. 50/- 7 Days R.I.
341 Till rising of
the court
506 Till rising of 50/- 7 Days R.I.
the court
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the trial Court
as well as the appellate Court without appreciating the evidence
properly wrongly convicted the applicants for the aforesaid offences.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRR.2350/2021
(Sumer Singh Rajpoot and Ors. Vs. State of M.P.)
He further submitted that it is alleged that in the incident applicants
assaulted complainant Mukesh and injured Dinesh, due to which they
sustained grievous injuries, but learned trial Court framed charges
against the applicants under Sections 325 (2 counts), 325/34 of IPC and
found the applicants guilty for all the charges and sentenced them as
aforesaid. Likewise there is no evidence on record to show that the
applicants wrongfully restrained complainant Mukesh and injured
Dinesh, even then learned trial Court as well as Appellate Court found
applicants guilty for the offence under Section 341 of the IPC. The
applicants are in custody since 17.09.2021 and the hearing of this
revision will take long time. Hence, prayed for suspension of sentence
and release of the applicants on bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and
submitted that learned trial court as well as learned appellant court did
not commit any mistake in finding the applicants guilty for the
aforesaid offences.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the
contention of learned counsel of the applicants and the fact that the
applicants are in custody since 17.09.2021 and according to listing
policy hearing of this revision will take time, the application is allowed.
It is, therefore, directed that execution of the jail sentence alone passed
against the applicants shall remain suspended during the pendency of
this revision and they be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond
in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand only) each with one
surety each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for
their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 21/12/2021 and on
such further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry during
the pendency of this revision.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
sarathe Judge
Digitally signed by
NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Date: 2021.11.16
16:43:39 +05'30'
