Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramdas Singh Gurjar @ D.K. Singh @ ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 April, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 797 of 2016
(RAMDAS SINGH GURJAR @ D.K. SINGH @ DHARMENDRA SHARMA @ R.D. SINGH Vs THE STATE OF
MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-04-2022
Shri Vivek SIngh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Mukesh Sharma, learned Govt.Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No. 26935/2021, which is fourth repeat application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant -
Ramdas Singh Gurjar alias D.K. Singh alias Dharmendra Sharma alias R.D. Singh.
The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section120-B, 170, 419,
420 and 376 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo 07 years RI with fine of Rs.
2,000/-, 1 year RI with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, 3 years R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, 3
years RI with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and 10 years' RI with fine of Rs.4,000/- with
default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
27.05.2016 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge Biaorra, District Rajgarh in
S.T.No.137/2013.
Prosecution case, in brief, is that appellant impersonating himself as ADM
allured the prosecutrix for marriage and thereafter committed rape upon her.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant's first and second
applications filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C.for suspension of sentence were
dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 07.09.2018 , 16.01.2019 and 15.02.2021
respectively. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that appellant is in
custody since 06.12.2013 and has suffered about eight and a half years of
custody out of total sentence of ten years awarded to him, which is more than 50%
of the total sentence. Appellant has been falsely implicated. There is no likelihood
of early conclusion of the trial. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances prays for
suspension of sentence and enlargement of appellant on bail, on such terms and
conditions this Court deems fit and proper.
Per contra, learned Govt.Advocate opposes the prayer for suspension of
sentence and submits that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the record.
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.04.23 12:21:23 IST
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment reported in (1994) 6 SCC 731
(Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing Under Trial Prisoners
Vs. Union of India and others) and affirmed in Criminal Appeal No.1640 of
2010 (Thana Singh Vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics) decided on 30.8.2010 has
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 should be considered as a
ground while considering the application for bail. In the instant case, since the
appellant has already undergone eight years and four months period out of total
sentence awarded to him, there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal,
therefore, considering the material pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant
as well as overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting on
merits of the case application is allowed.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already
not deposited, appellant shall be released on bail, on furnishing personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court firstly on 13.06.2022, and on such other dates, as may be
fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.26935/2021 is allowed.
List in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.04.23 12:21:23 IST
