Baldeo vs Office Of The Principal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5901 MP

                                                                          1
                                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                                  CRA No. 159 of 2015
                                                     (BALDEO Vs OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL SCIENTIFIC ADVISER)

                                   Dated : 22-04-2022
                                         Shri Pushpendra Dubey, Advocate for the appellant.

                                         Shri Arvind Singh, GA for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No. 5424/2021, which is fourth application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

Previous two applications were dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.04.2015 and 21.08.2019. Another application I.A. No. 19811/2015 was

dismissed on merit vide order dated 02.12.2016.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 302 & 498-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and R.I. for two years with fine of Rs. 500/-, with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the matter. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that offence comes under Section 325 of IPC but the trial court has wrongly convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 of IPC. There are so many contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Appellant has served

more than seven years of jail sentence and final hearing of this appeal will take considerable time; therefore, it is prayed that jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposed the application and supported the judgment of trial court. Learned counsel for the respondent-State further submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is based on proper appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence and the appellant has committed henious offence. Therefore, sentence of the appellant should not be suspended.

We have heard contentions of both the parties and perused the record. There are material evidence available on record against the appellant. As per Signature Not Verified SAN prosecution case appellant has murdered his wife Smt. Meera. First and third application of the appellant were dismissed as withdrawn and Second application Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.04.26 17:08:22 IST

was dismissed on merit after considering the testimony of deceased's father Goma (P.W.-2) and sister Reena (PW.-9) who saw the incident, there is no change in circumstances, except the custody period of the appellant which is not sufficient to suspend the remaining sentence.

Considering the overall evidence on record and gravity of the offence, We are not inclined to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant.

Hence, I.A. No. 5424/2021 is dismissed.

List the matter for final hearing in due course.

                                     (SMT. ANJULI PALO)                                (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
                                           JUDGE                                                JUDGE

                                   MISHRA




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR
MISHRA
Date: 2022.04.26 17:08:22 IST