Jahid vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6901 MP

-1-                                          CRA No.201/2018

  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
                         CRA NO.201/2018
Jahid s/o Mohammad Hussain Musalman
Age 22 years, Occ. Labour, R/o Kesharpura,
PS & Tehsil Mahidpur, District Ujjain M.P  ....Appellant.

vs.


State of MM.P Through PS Mahidpur,
District Ujjain M.P                            .....Respondent.

27.10.2021: (Indore):

Shri Manish Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri V.Sakargayen, learned GA for the respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.24035/21, a second repeat application for suspension of sentence filed u/s 389 Cr.P.C on behalf of appellant Jahid who has been convicted u/s 302/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months vide judgment dated 30.12.2017 passed by ASJ, Mahidpur, district Ujjain.

As per prosecution story on 15.8.2014 deceased Irfan lodged an FIR that on the date of incident he was sitting near Kesarpura Dargah. Accused Wahid came there and demanded his mobile but its battery was discharged due to which he started abusing him by filthy language and blamed that he deliberately switched off the mobile. Thereafter he took out iron pipe and assaulted him and he started bleeding from left hand. In between Jahid and Shoukat also came there. Jahid assaulted him by means of iron pipe and Shoukat by means of knife. He sustained injury on his left hand and leg. Thereafter they left by threatening him. He lodged a report in the police station Mahidpur which was registered vide crime no.262/2014 u/s 326, 294, 506 & 34 IPC. The matter was taken up for investigation. The injured Irfan remained in the hospital for 4 days and succumbed to the injuries on 18.08.2018. Accordingly, offence u/s 302 IPC was added and the accused persons were arrested. On completion of investigation charge

-2- CRA No.201/2018

sheet was filed. The prosecution has examined 13 witnesses and after evaluating the evidence all the 3 accused have been convicted and sentenced as stated above.

Shri Manish Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant has wrongly been convicted u/s 302 IPC. The appellant remained under treatment for 4 days but no dying declaration was recorded by the police. The injuries were not on the vital part. The offence would not travel more than section 304 Part-I or Part-II IPC. The appellant was arrested but during trial he was on bail and he never misused the liberty. This is an appeal of the year 2018 and there is no possibility of final hearing of this appeal in near future. He has undergone more than 4 years of sentence, hence the jail sentence be kindly suspended.

Learned Govt. Advocate opposes the aforesaid prayer by submitting that the appellant is said to have caused injury by means of iron rod. As many as 8 injuries were found as per the PM report and they were sufficient to cause the death. There was no provocation by the deceased, hence the appellant has rightly been convicted u/s 302/34 IPC.

We have perused the record.

Initially, the dispute was started between Wahid and deceased and later on appellant Jahid and Shoukat were said to have joined them. Initially, the FIR was registered under sections 294, 506, 326 & 34 IPC. The deceased remained four days in hospital. In the FIR he did not allege that the accused persons assaulted him with intention to kill. Looking to the period of custody and there is no likelihood of final hearing of this appeal in near future, the application is allowed. It is directed that the jail sentence passed against the appellant shall remain suspended and he be released on bail upon his depositing the fine amount (if already not deposited) and furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 07.02.2022 and on

-3- CRA No.201/2018

such further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.

C.c as per rules.

      (SUJOY PAUL)                           (VIVEK RUSIA)
           JUDGE                                 JUDGE


      Digitally signed by HARI
      KUMAR C G NAIR
      Date: 2021.10.28 17:03:28
      +05'30'
hk/