Munna And 2 Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4956 MP

 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

                        Cr.A. No.430/2013
        (Munna and others Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh)
                                                                         -1-

Indore, dated 02/09//2021
        Ms. Shanno Khan, learned counsel for the appellants.

        Shri Valmik Sakargaye, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent / State.

Heard on I.A. No.909/2021, which is first application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence on behalf of the appellants.

The appellants suffered conviction and sentence as under:-

     Conviction                             Sentence

  Section    Act      Imprisonment          Fine     If Imprisonment in
                                            deposited lieu of fine

  452        IPC      2 Years R.I.          500/-        3 Months
  323/34     IPC      3 Months R.I.         100/-        1 Month S.I.
  366        IPC      4 Years RI            500/-        3 Months S.I.
  302/34     IPC      Life Imprisonment 10,000/-         4 Months S.I.

Learned counsel for the applicants/appellants submits that applicants/appellants are permanent residents of district Indore and there is no apprehension of their absconsion. They were on bail during trial and they did not misuse the liberty granted to them and final conclusion of trial is likely to take a sufficient long time, under these circumstances, he prays that execution of jail sentence of the appellants be suspended. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon a judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manker Ram Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (11) SCC, 238 in support of his contentions.

Per contra, learned government advocate for the respondent/State opposes the prayer and submits that appellants were rightly convicted HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

Cr.A. No.430/2013 (Munna and others Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh)

and sentenced by the trial court on the basis of the cogent and reliable evidence produced by the prosecution, hence, no case for suspension of jail sentence is made out. He prays for dismissal of the application.

After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the injured witnesses Kondlibai PW-1; Maknabai PW-2 and Chaniya PW-6 as well as the eye witnesses Ankar PW-3; Bhaya PW-4 and Gul PW-5 have deposed that appellant No.1 murdered Khoom Singh by using weapon, bow-arrow (Teer Kaman) and axe (Kulhadi). They also caused injuries to Kondlibai, Maknabai and Chaniya. There are no contradictions between ocular and medical evidence and in view of the overwhelming, cogent and reliable evidence available on records, without commenting upon the merits of the case, we are of the considered opinion that no case is made out for suspension of jail sentence of the appellants. Accordingly, I.A. No.909/2021 is dismissed.

C.C. as per rules.

          (Sujoy Paul)                                       (Anil Verma)
             Judge                                             Judge



         N.R.
Digitally signed by
NARENDRA KUMAR
RAIPURIA
Date: 2021.09.03
14:49:39 +05'30'