Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shailab Kumar Lal @ Bahubali vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 April, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4794 of 2021
(SHAILAB KUMAR LAL @ BAHUBALI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA No. 5433 of 2021
(ANKIT SHARMA @ CHHOTU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 29-04-2022
Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant for Shailab
Kumar Lal @ Bahubali in Cr. A. No. 4794 of 2021.
Shri Sharad Verma, learned counsel for the appellant for Ankit Sharma @
Chhotu in Cr. A. No. 5433 of 2021.
Shri Ajay Shukla, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State.
I.A.No.14863/21 and IA No. 20312 of 21 applications for suspension of
remaining jail sentence and grant of bail are taken up.
The appellants in both the appeals have been convicted under Section 364-
A, r/w Section 120-B of IPC to undergo RI for Life and fine of Rs.1000/- with
default stipulation and under Section 365, r/w 120-B of IPC to undergo RI for
seven years and fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.
It is common ground taken by learned counsel for both the appellants that
as per prosecution story on 24.10.2016 at around 6 a.m. the victim Babulal
proceeded to resume his duties from Bashkhala to Bijuri Kalri on his motorcycle.
In mid way accused Shailab, Madhusudan Soni, Ankit Sharma, Sunil Soni, Lalji
Singh Gond, Prem Panika @ Banti were standing. They stopped his
motorcycle and tied him with a rope and forcibly taken him in a Bolero vehicle
near Chainpur. From there the victim was taken to forest of Kathotiya. The
victim's son Shyamlal at around 10 a.m. received a telephonic call from an
unknown person demanding Rs. 5 lacs to release the victim.
Learned cousnel for the both the appellants urged that out of the said
accused persons, the court below has convicted only the present appellants
Shailab Kumar Lal @ Bahubali, Ankit Sharma @ Chhotu and Sonil Soni, (out of
eleven accused).
By taking this court to Para-11 of the judgment, it is urged that the court
below has rightly reproduced the relevant portion of deposition of the victim
Babulal, (PW-2) and there opined that on the basis of statement of this star
witness, it can be concluded that the persons who stopped the victim, forcibly
taken him to forest and the persons who tied him in the forest could not be
identified by this victim. Thus, no conclusion can be drawn on the basis of
statement of the victim against the overtact of the present appellants.
The court below opined that the case is based on circumstantial evidence.
One such circumstance was the mobile recording. By placing reliance on Para-18
of the judgement, it is mentioned that the court below itself disbelieved the
electronic evidence and opined that the appellants cannot be held guilty on the
basis of mobile recording/electronic evidence. In Para-22, the court below opined
that who called demanding ransom is also not proved. Similarly, it is held that a
register was recovered from Santosh Kumar Dwivedi and on the basis of names
so entered in the said register, the accused were arraigned in the matter
whereas SIM number and its source could have been established in a different
way. It is submitted that the appellants have undergone approximately six years
actual custody. The conviction is based on conjecture and surmises. It cannot be
said that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The final
hearing of this appeal may take time, and therefore, remaining jail sentence of
these two appellants may be suspended.
The prayer is opposed by Shri Shukla, learned Government Advocate on
the basis of objection.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
In view of aforesaid factual backdrop and findings of the court below,
without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, we deem it proper to
suspend the remaining of these two appellants.
It is further directed that subject to verification of depositing the fine amount
and on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousand)
alongwith one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court by each
appellant, Shailab Kumar Lal @ Bahubali a n d Ankit Sharma @ Chhotu
shall be released on bail with a further direction to remain present before the trial
court Anuppur on 17th October 2022 and on such other dates as may be fixed
by the trial court Anuppur in this regard till disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.14863/21 and IA No. 20312 of 21 stand disposed of.
(SUJOY PAUL) (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
bks
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Date: 2022.04.30 11:34:22 IST
