Dinesh Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6749 MP

                                    1                               CRA-177-2016
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   CRA-177-2016
                    (DINESH JATAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

18
Gwalior, Dated : 23-10-2021
      Shri Deependra Singh Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Dy. Advocate General for the
respondent/State.

Hear d on I.A. No.29459/2021, which is fourth application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant- Dinesh

Jatav. Earlier applications were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dt.13.10.2016, 04.09.2018, 28.01.2020 respectively.

This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 19.12.2015 passed in Sessions Trial No.278/2010 passed by the third Additional Sessions Judge, District Shivpuri, whereby the present appellant was convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to suffer additional R.I. for two months.

Prosecution story, as found proved, is that on 06.09.2010 at about 6.45 in the evening, when the complainant was sitting in the shop, at that time

deceased Dharmendra came there holding his hand on the chest and informed that present appellant Dinesh Jatav, and co-accused persons, namely; Ravi Jatav and Rajkumar @ Rajjo Ojha came and due to previous animosity with intent to kill started firing from desi katta. The present appellant fired a gun shot on Dharmendra, which hit near his chest. Another deceased Gangaram also received gun shot injury and fell down. Thereafter all of them ran away. When the deceased Dharmendra and Gangaram brought to the hospital, they were declared dead. On the basis of the aforesaid, an FIR has been registered at Crime No.459/2010.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Learned trial Court has not considered the material evidence available on record. The appellant was on 2 CRA-177-2016 bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty so granted. An early hearing of this appeal is not possible and owing to COVID-19 outbreak, detention of appellant in already congested prisons may b e detrimental. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for suspension of sentence is made.

Learned Dy. Advocate General for the State opposed the prayer by

submitting that Susheela Bai (P.W.3) and Gajendra Singh (P.W.5) are the eye witnesses, who have deposed against the present appellant. Direct evidence is available on record and on such grounds, prays for dismissal of the application.

Taking into facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits thereof, in the opinion of this Court no case for grant of suspension of sentence is made out.

Consequently, I.A. No.29459/2021 stands dismissed.

    (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)                         (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
             JUDGE                                             JUDGE

shanu*
Digitally signed by
SHANU RAIKWAR
Date: 2021.10.27
12:24:05 -07'00'