Madhya Pradesh High Court
Omprakash @ Om And 4 Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 April, 2022
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 630 of 2013
(OMPRAKASH @ OM AND 4 ORS. AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 18-04-2022
Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri K.K. Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.1137/2022 which is second repeat application for
suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the appellant no. 5 - Nattu alias Vishal.
Also heard on I.A. No. 3616/2022 which is fifth repeat application for
suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the appellant no. No. 3 - Vinod. His first
application was dismissed on merits while his second and third applications for
temporary suspension of sentence were dismissed and his fourth application was
dismissed as withdrawn.
The appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under Sections
148, 302/149, 364/149 of IPC and sentenced to suffer 1 year R.I. with fine of Rs.
500/- ,life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- and life imprisonment with fine of
Rs. 2,000/- each respectively with default stipulations vide judgment dated
12.04.2013 passed in S.T. No. 465/2008.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as per prosecution case
itself, both the appellants were wielding weapons such as lathi and out of 19
injuries found on the body of the deceased, none of them is attributable as assault
b y lathi. Learned counsel has also drawn our attention to the jail report dated
16.04.2022. As per the said jail report, appellant no. 3 - Vinod has undergone 10
years and two months and appellant no. 5 - Nattu alias Vishal has undergone than
10 years 04 months of actual jail incarceration without remission. Appellants were
on bail during trial and they have not misused the liberty so granted. Learned
counsel further relied upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing Undertrial
Prisoners Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (1994)6 SCC 731 wherein
it has been held that if the period of custody has been undergone by the accused
for more than 50% of the sentence that is awarded, the same shall constitute a
ground to enlarge the appellant on bail subject to the conditions mentioned therein.
He also submits that there is no likelihood of the appeal coming up for hearing in
the near future and prays for suspension of sentence.
Learned Government Advocate opposes the aforesaid application and prays
for its rejection.
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
The appellants herein have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life
for the offence punishable u/S 302 r/W 149, 364 r/W 149 of IPC. Since they have
already undergone custody for a period of more than 10 years and considering the
judgment passed in the case of Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing
Undertrial Prisoners (Supra), we are of the considered view that it is a fit case for
suspension of the sentence and grant of bail to the appellants. Hence, without
expressing any opinion on merits of the matter I.A.No.1137/2022 and I.A. No.
3616/2022 are allowed and jail sentence of the appellants shall remain suspended.
I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
deposited, they shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each along with a solvent surety
in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court firstly on 10.05.2022, and on such other dates, as may be
fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.1137/2022 and I.A. No. 3616/2022 are allowed.
List in due course
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
sh
SEHAR HASEEN
2022.04.19
17:31:28
+05'30'
