Karu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7758 MP

                 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                    1
                                             Cr.A.No.1312/2018
                                  Karu & Others Vs. State of M.P.

Gwalior Bench Dated 24.11.2021

      Shri Rajmani Bansal, learned counsel for the appellants.

      Shri Neelsh Tomar, learned PP for the respondent/State.

Shri Aditya Singh Ghuraiya, learned counsel for the

complainant.

Heard on I.A.No.21247/2020, an application under Section

389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail on

behalf of appellant No.2 -Janved Singh Yadav.

This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 29-01-20218

passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Lahar District Bhind in S.T.

No.165/2015 whereby appellant No.2 - Janved Singh Yadav has been

convicted as under:

    Section             Imprisonment                     Fine
307/149 of IPC             10 years             Rs.1,000/-         with
                                                default stipulation.
148 of IPC                 2 years              Rs.500/- with default
                                                stipulation.
25(1-b)(a), 27              3 years             Rs.1,000/-          with
of Arms Act                                     default stipulation

It is the submission of learned counsel for appellant No.2 that

the trial Court erred in convicting and awarding jail sentence to

appellant No.2 - Janved Singh Yadav. He has suffered more than 4

years 5 months incarceration out of total 10 years jail sentence. It is

further submitted that evidence of Vijaypal Singh (PW-2) and Banti

(PW-4) indicates that appellant No.2 - Janved Singh Yadav caused HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Cr.A.No.1312/2018 Karu & Others Vs. State of M.P.

gun shot to the injured witness from 15-20 ft. but medical report and

testimony of Dr. Narendra Sharma (PW-7) indicates that there was

charring and blackening all over wound and charring and blackening

indicates that gun shot was made from close distance of 2-3 ft. In this

regard he cited latest judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Rajesh

alias Sarkari and another Vs. State of Haryana, (2021) 1 SCC 118

and relied upon para 42. He has good case on merits and early hearing

of appeal is bleak possibility. Learned counsel fairly submits that if

appellant is released on bail then he shall abide by all conditions

imposed by this Court. He further undertakes to abide by all the terms

and conditions of guidance, circulars and directions issued by Central

Government, State Government as well as Local Administration

regarding measures in respect of COVID-19 Pandemic and maintain

hygiene in the vicinity while keeping physical distancing. Appellant

further undertakes voluntarily to perform community service to purge

his misdeed, if any and to serve National /Environmental/Social cause

on his own volition.

Learned counsel for the State and complainant opposed the

application and prayed for its dismissal.

Looking to the submission made by learned counsel for the

parties as well as the fact that final hearing of this appeal would take

some time, application I.A.No.21247/2020 is hereby allowed.

If appellant No.2 - Janved Singh Yadav furnishes bail bond in HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Cr.A.No.1312/2018 Karu & Others Vs. State of M.P.

the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with

one surety bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial

Court that he shall appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court

on 28-01-2022 and on all other subsequent dates as may be fixed by

the Office for appearance, then he shall be released on bail and

execution of jail sentence is suspended till disposal of this appeal,

subject to payment of fine.

Appellant No.2 - Janved Singh Yadav shall not be source of

harassment and embarrassment to the complainant party in any

manner and shall not move in their vicinity otherwise the benefit

of bail shall be withdrawn immediately.

,rn~ }kjk ;g funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkosnd 5 ikS/kksa dk

¼;FkklaHko dksbZ Hkh Qy nsus okys isM+ vFkok [email protected] tSls isM+½

jksi.k djsxk rFkk mls vius vkl iM+ksl esa isM+ksa dh lqj{kk dh O;oLFkk djuh

gksxh rkfd ikS/ks lqjf{kr jg ldsA vkosnd dk ;g drZO; gS fd u dsoy ikS/kksa

dks yxk;k tk,s] cfYd mUgsa iks"k.k Hkh fn;k tk,A ^^o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk]

o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gSA^^ vkosnd laHkor% 6&8 QhV ÅWaps

ikS/[email protected]+ksa dks 3&4 QhV xM~<k djds yxk;sxk rkfd os 'kh?kz gh iw.kZ

fodflr gks ldsaA vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djus ds fy,] vkosnd dks fjgk fd;s

tkus dh fnukad ls 30 fnuksa ds Hkhrj lacaf/kr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k

o`{[email protected]/kksa ds jksi.k ds lHkh QksVks çLrqr djuk gksxsaA rRi'pkr~] fopkj.k ds

lekiu rd gj rhu eghus esa vkosnd ds }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Cr.A.No.1312/2018 Karu & Others Vs. State of M.P.

izxfr fjiksVZ çLrqr dh tk,xh A o`{kksa dh çxfr ij fuxjkuh j[kuk fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk drZO; gS

D;ksafd i;kZoj.k {kj.k ds dkj.k ekuo vfLrRo nkao ij gS vkSj U;k;ky;

vuqikyu ds ckjs esa vkosnd }kjk fn[kkbZ xbZ fdlh Hkh ykijokgh dks utj

vankt ugh dj ldrk gSA blfy, vkosnd dks isM+ksa dh çxfr vkSj

vkosnd }kjk vuqikyu ds lac/a k esa ,d fjiksVZ çLrqr djus ds fy, funZsf'kr

fd;k tkrk gS ,oa vkonsd }kjk fd;s x;s vuqikyu dh ,d la{kfIr fjiskVZ bl

U;k;ky; ds le{k izR;sd rhu ekg esa ¼vxys N% eghuksa ds fy,½ j[kh tk;sxh

ftls fd ^^funsZ'k^^ 'kh"kZ ds varxZr j[kk tk,xkA

o`{kkjksi.k esa ;k isM+ksa dh ns[kHkky esa vkosnd dh vksj ls dh xbZ dksbZ

Hkh pwd vkosnd dks tekur dk ykHk ysus ls oafpr dj ldrh gSA

vkosnd dks viuh ilan ds LFkku ij bu ikS/[email protected] dks jksius dh

Lora=rk gksxh] ;fn og bu jksis x;s isMksa dh Vªh xkMZ ;k ckM+ yxkdj j{kk

djuk pkgrk gS] rks og vius Loa; ds O;; ij ;g djus ds fy;s Lora=

gksxkA

bl U;k;ky; }kjk ;g funsZ'k ,d ijh{k.k izdj.k ds rkSj ij

fn, x, gSa rkfd fgalk vkSj cqjkbZ ds fopkj dk izfrdkj] l`tu ,oa

izd`fr ds lkFk ,dkdkj gksus ds ek/;e ls lkeaktL; LFkkfir fd;k

tk ldsA orZeku esa ekuo vfLrRo ds vko';d vax ds :i esa n;k]

lsok] izse ,oaa d:a.kk dh izd`fr dks fodflr djus dh vko';drk gS

D;ksafd ;g ekuo thou dh ewyHkwr izo`fr;ka gSa vkSj ekuo vfLrRo dks

cuk, j[kus ds fy, budk iquthZfor gksuk vko';d gSA HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Cr.A.No.1312/2018 Karu & Others Vs. State of M.P.

^^;g iz;kl dsoy ,d o`{k ds jksi.k dk iz'u u gksdj cfYd ,d

fopkj ds vadqj.k dk gSA^^

;g funsZ'k vkosnd ds }kjk Lor% O;Dr dh xbZ lkeqnkf;d lsok dh bPNk ds dkj.k fn;k x;k gS tks LoSfPNd gSA It is expected from appellant that he shall submit photographs by downloading the mobile application (App) prepared at the instance of High Court for monitoring the plantation through satellite/Geo- Tagging.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for

information and necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Anand Pathak) Judge Anil*

ANIL Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

KUMAR BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=8512f40a1a9eaa50b6802d068b51dae27 e84c266b09d283f0799e67cdc7df50f,

CHAURASI pseudonym=F7E569EA2A8955818DF870B0C507 64B46C526E80, serialNumber=EC534CBB3B245F050119F06F4A29 6DD83C765A1E2ACC6EC7D8BD8CBCC9C2446E, cn=ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA

YA Date: 2021.11.20 17:14:02 -08'00'