Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hemant @ Sheru vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 October, 2021
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
CRA No. 577/2020
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA No. 577/2020
(RAVIRAJ @ MONU PANDEY Vs STATE OF M.P.)
Jabalpur, Dated :01.10.2021
Shri Prashant Singh, Senior Advocate with Shri Kapil
Sharma learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Pradeep Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No. 7131/2021 which is first application under
Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension
of sentence on behalf of the appellant No.1 Hemant @ Sheru.
The appellant stands convicted and sentenced by the trial Court
as under:
Conviction Sentence
Under Section Imprisonment Fine amount Imprisonment
(If deposited in lieu of Fine
details) amount
302of IPC R.I. for Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for 1
(fine deposited) month.
25(1-B)(a) of Indian Arms Act, R.I. for one Rs.500/- R.I. for 15
1959 year (fine deposited) days.
27(1) of Indian Arms Act, 1959 R.I. for three Rs.500/- R.I. for 15
years (fine deposited) days.
As per the case of prosecution, on 23.03.2016 at around 01:30
p.m., complainant Bhagwandas was present at Chouhan Dhaba
alongwith some others, after some time deceased Pappu Sahu came
there at Dhaba with country made liquor. When the present appellant
alongwith four others came on two motorcycle and they fired three
gunshot on deceased from his pistol due to which deceased fell down
on the ground.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that all the eye-
witnesses in this case have turned hostile and they are not supported
the prosecution case. He referred the statement of PW-7 Rohit Sahu S/o
Late Narmada Prasad who has also not supported the prosecution case.
He further referred the statement of PW-8 Amit Sahu S/o Kashiram
CRA No. 577/2020
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sahu, PW-9 Lakhanlal Sahu S/o Khunnilal Sahu, PW-10 Dharmendra
Sahu S/o Late Narmada Prasad and PW-3 Bhagwan Das Chauhan
(informant) and submits that they HAVE not supported the prosecution
case and even the seizure of pistol from the appellant has not been
proved by the seizure witness PW-8 Amit Sahu. It is further contended
that as per the prosecution, recovery of pistol is alleged to have been
made from the present appellant Hemant @ Sheru and from the
appellant No.3 Jaswant S/o Ramsingh. It is further submitted that
appellant No.2 Mukesh S/o Shri Foolchand Sahu and appellant No.3
Jaswant have already been granted the benefit of suspension of
sentence by this Court. It is further submitted that all the eye witnesses
have turned hostile and there is no evidence against the present
appellant connecting him with the commission of offence in the present
case.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State submits that the
Investigating Officer has proved the seizure and relied on the
paragraph 50 & 51 of the judgment of the trial Court.
However, taking into consideration the evidence of PW-7, PW-8,
PW-9, PW-10 and PW-3 as they have not supported the case of
prosecution and further that seizure of pistol from the appelalnt has not
been proved by the prosecution as the seizure witness have turned
hostile and the other appellants have already been granted the benefit
of suspension of sentence, we are of the opinion that the appellant is
entitled for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, the I.A. No. 7131/2021 is allowed.
It is directed that, the execution of the jail sentence of the
appellant Hemnat @ Sheru shall remain suspended during pendency
of the present appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only)
with one solvent surety in the like amount and a local surety to the
satisfaction of the trial Court
The appellant shall now appear before the Registry of this
Court on 13.12.2021, and on such other dates which normally will not
CRA No. 577/2020
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
be less than the period of eight months as may be directed to him in
this regard till final disposal of this appeal.
The prison authorities are also requested to ensure compliance
with the order passed by the Supreme Court IN RE: CONTAGION
OF COVID 19VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU - W.P. (C)
No.1/2020 and ensure that the applicant be examined by the jail doctor
before their release. If the applicant show symptoms of COVID-19, the
doctor shall forthwith direct him to be produced before the appropriate
hospital designated for the detection and treatment of COVID-19
patients. If the doctor is of the opinion that the applicant is not affected
with the virus, the jail authorities shall ensure his transportation from
the jail till his place of residence.
A typed copy of this order is being forwarded to the Office of the
Advocate General and to Shri Pradeep Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer
for the respondent on their respective e-mail addresses. The Office is
requested to forward a copy of this order to the learned Court below.
Accordingly I.A. No. 7131/2021 stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Amitabh
Digitally signed by AMITABH RANJAN
Date: 2021.10.01 17:03:48 +05'30'
