Shailendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5617 MP

                                                                           1
                                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                                      CRA-01033-2022
                                                        ((SHAILENDRA SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH))

                                                                CRA/00388/2022, CRA/01033/2022
                                      Dated : 19-04-2022
                                            Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr.A. No.388/2022

                                      and Cr.A. No.1033/2022.
                                            Shri Ghanshyam Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr.A. No.
                                      748/2022.
                                            Shri Pramod Kumar Choubey, learned Deputy Government Advocate for

                                      the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.3920/2022, I.A.No.575/2022 and I.A. No. 1644/2022, applications for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellants have been convicted in S.T.No.866/2012 (State of M.P Vs. Vishwanath Singh and others) for commission of offence under Sections 402, 450, 395 and 397 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years in each offence and for Sections 25(1-B)(a) and 27 of Arms Act have been sentenced to undergo 1 year RI & 5 years RI respectively and fine of Rs.500/- for each offence with default stipulations by ASJ/ Special Judge (Electricity Act No.2) Bhopal.

Learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that FIR was lodged against four unidentified persons by Rajesh Sen on 29.07.2012, appellants were arrested on 26.08.2012 whereas their identification parade was conducted on 19.10.2012, almost after a period of one month and 22 days of their arrest and in the meantime, appellants were shown to the witnesses. They have taken me through the evidence of PW-2 Rajesh Sen who in his evidence has stated that at the time of incident of loot, house owner Korsolia's mother and his son Saurabh were inside the house. They have not been examined as witnesses by the prosecution before the trial Court. Learned counsel have further contended that even prior to conduction of test identification parade in jail, appellants/accused were again shown to the witnesses. Therefore, identification parade is of no consequence.

Signature Not Verified Learned counsel further submitted that no identification parade regarding SAN

Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA identification of looted and seized articles and was ever conducted. No one in his CHOUBEY Date: 2022.04.20 11:11:56 IST

evidence has deposed about looted and seized articles. Learned counsel further

contended that as per the FIR, only four persons had caused the loot. There is no specific evidence on record that any other person had extended logistic support to accused persons to facilitate commission of offence. Therefore, no offence under Section 395 of IPC is made out. There was no evidence before trial Court to

convict the appellants/accused for commission of offence under Sections 395 and 397 of Cr.P.C. Appellants/accused have no criminal past. Appellants have already suffered more than a year sentence. Therefore, it has been prayed that appellants be released on bail.

O n the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail applications but has fairly admitted that appellants have no criminal past.

On a perusal of impugned judgment, evidence of prosecution witnesses and other material on record, it is revealed that identification parade was conducted almost after one month and 22 days of the arrest of the accused persons and prior to that they were shown to witnesses in police station and their photographs were published in the newspapers. Looted mobiles and passports have not been identified by anyone belonging to Karsoliya family. Appellants have already undergone sentence for a period of almost of a year. Therefore, having considered the evidence of prosecution witnesses available on record and the argument that only four persons were alleged in the commission of loot but later charge-sheet was filed against seven persons and appellants have been convicted under Section 395 and 397 of IPC. However, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am inclined to release all the appellants on bail.

Consequently, I.A.No.3920/2022, I.A. No.575/2022 and I.A. No. 1644/2022, are allowed. The execution of jail sentence of appellants- Monu @ Pawan Sharma, Sonu, Gyani @ Gyanendra Singh and Shailendra Singh is hereby suspended till further orders subject to depositing of the fine amount, (if not already deposited). It is directed that the appellants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond to a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two Lakh only) each with two solvent sureties each of the one-one lakh amount to the Signature Not Verified SAN satisfaction of the trial court with a further direction to appear before the Trial Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA CHOUBEY Date: 2022.04.20 11:11:56 IST Court on 12.09.2022 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by the trial

Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

List the case after receipt of explaination.

Certified copy as per rules.

(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE

anu

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA CHOUBEY Date: 2022.04.20 11:11:56 IST