Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bherulal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 April, 2022
Author: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 729 of 2015
(BHERULAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 05-04-2022
Shri Deepesh Malviya, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent State.
Heard on I.A. No.1099/2022, which is second application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence on behalf of the
appellant no.1 Bherulal Bheel.
The appellant no.1 has been convicted along with other two appellants under
Section 302/34 and 326/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and
five years R.I with fine of Rs.2,000/- each with default stipulations vide judgment
dated 15.04.2015 delivered in Sessions Trial No.331/2010 by Sessions Judge,
District Ratlam.
The jail sentence of appellant no.2 Shantilal and appellant no.3 Sukhram
have already been suspended by this Court vide order dated 02.02.2018 and
29.08.2017.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that so far as the present
appellant no.1 is concern he is having parity with the other two co-accused as all
have been convicted under Section 302/34 and 326/34 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo life imprisonment and five years R.I with fine of Rs.2,000/-. Ishwarlal
(PW-10) is injured as well as eye witness has not stated that appellant no.1 has
caused fatal injury. All the appellants said to have jointly assaulted the deceased by
means of stick and Dhariya. Therefore, it cannot be said that the injury caused by
appellant no.1 is fatal. It is further submitted that at the time of incident he was 60
years and now he is aged about 70 years and he has no criminal past. This appeal
is of 2015 and is likely to take sufficient long time. He has already completed more
than 7 years of jail sentence, i.e, sentence awarded under Section 326 of IPC,
hence, his jail sentence be suspended.
Learned counsel for the respondent State has opposed the prayer.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN REENA PARTHO
SARKAR
Date: 2022.04.06
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments
10:33:35 IST
advanced by learned counsel for the parties,we are of the the considered opinion
that the application for suspension of custodial sentence moved on behalf of the
appellant no.1 deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, I.A. No.1099/2022 is allowed and it is directed that subject to
depositing fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by the appellant no.1 in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before
the Court, the execution of custodial part of the sentence shall remain suspended,
till the final disposal of this appeal.
The appellant no.1 after being enlarged on bail, the appellant no.1 shall mark
his presence before concerned trial court on 26/09/2022 and on all such
subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by Trial Court concerned.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
das
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN REENA PARTHO
SARKAR
Date: 2022.04.06
10:33:35 IST
