Kanchi Urf Shivdayal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5524 MP

                                   1                              CRA-7467-2018
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   CRA-7467-2018
         (KANCHI URF SHIVDAYAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

14
Jabalpur, Dated : 16-09-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.
      Mr. Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellants.
      Mr. Vikram Johri, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.1594/2020 which is second application for suspension of sentence on behalf of the appellant No.2- Ramesh.

The first application (I.A. No.17076/2018) filed on behalf of the appellant No.2- Ramesh along with other appellants was dismissed on merits vide order dated 12.07.2019.

The Appellant No.2 has been convicted vide impugned judgment dated 14.09.2018 passed by learned Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989, district- Chhatarpur in Special Case No.132/2012 for offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (on two counts) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life (two counts) with fine of Rs.1,000/- (on each count)

with stipulated default.

As per the prosecution case, on 03.07.2012 at about 08:00 PM the appellants along with other co-accused persons assaulted Santosh Upadhyay, Chaturbhuj and Munnu Bunkar with sticks. When the victims were being taken to the hospital, in the midway the appellants along with other co- accused persons again assaulted them. During treatment Munnu Bunkar and Rakesh Upadhyay were died.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellant No.2- Ramesh has been wrongly convicted by the trial Court as there is no evidence against him. Referring to testimony of various witnesses it is contended that there are contradictory testimonies of the witnesses and no independent witness has supported the prosecution case. It is further 2 CRA-7467-2018 contended that disposal of the present appeal would take considerable time, hence, it is prayed that sentence imposed on the appellant No.2- Ramesh be suspended and he be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the suspension application and has submitted that there is evidence of injured eye witness against the appellant No.2. Hence, looking to his role in commission of crime, the

application may be rejected.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. In the alleged incident, four persons were injured out of them two, namely, Rakesh and Munnu Bunkar died during treatment. Munnu died of head injuries. The postmortem report Exhibit P-23 reveals that Rakesh died due to head injuries. The doctor found many grievous injuries on the head of the deceased including depressed fracture present on skull on frontal and whole of parietal region admeasuring 18 cm x 7 cm with multiple pieces depressed inside.

Chaturbhuj Upadhyay (PW-3), Bhagwat Prasad (PW-4), Tijua Bunkar (PW-5) and Suresh (PW-7) have supported the prosecution case and stated against the appellant No.2 Ramesh describing the role played by him. There is evidence of injured eye witnesses against the appellant No.2. That apart, the first application for suspension of sentence was dismissed on merits on 12.07.2019 and we find no change in circumstances.

In view of the above, I.A. No.1594/2020 is dismissed.

           (PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA)                                (SMT. ANJULI PALO)
                  JUDGE                                                  JUDGE


      ks

Digitally signed by
KOUSHLENDRA SHARAN
SHUKLA
Date: 2021.09.20 06:05:07
-07'00'