Pawan Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 10369 MP

                                                                        1
                                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                         AT JABALPUR
                                                            CRA No. 5502 of 2021
                                              (PAWAN RAJAK AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                         Dated : 01-08-2022
                                   Mr. Mayank Prajapati, learned counsel for the appellant No.1.

                                   Dr. Anuvad Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant No.2.
                                   Ms. Shakti Tripathi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No.19556 of 2022 which is first application filed on behalf of the appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

By the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court the appellants have been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 148 and 307/149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for two years (fine Rs.1,000/-) and RI for ten years (fine Rs.4,000/-), respectively with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants are innocent and have been erroneously convicted by the Court below. It is contended that the trial Court has not considered the evidence on record on proper perspective and

hence, arrived at incorrect findings. In the medical examination the doctor did not find the injuries to have been caused by rod or wooden stick. There are material contradictions and omissions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses. The appellants are in custody and final disposal of this appeal would take considerable time, hence, it is prayed that custodial sentence of the appellants may be suspended Signature Not Verified SAN and they may be released on bail.

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.08.01 17:21:21 IST Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Though all the accused persons were present at the time of the incident and assaulted the victim in a preplanned manner however, the role of appellant No.-2 Rahul Kumar Rajak is totally different from accused Pawan Rajak. The appellant No.2- Rahul Kumar Rajak assaulted the victim with a rod. The trial Court in paragraph 45 of the impugned judgment held that accused/appellant No.1- Pawan Rajak has fired gun shot from his pistol on the victim because of which, he sustained grievous injuries on his stomach.

Hence, this application is dismissed so far as it pertains to the appellant No.1

- Pawan Rajak. However, looking to the role attributed to the appellant No.2 and his custody period as well as his age, without commenting on the merits of the case this application is allowed so far as it pertains to the appellant No.2 - Rahul Kumar Rajak.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of appellant No.2 - Rahul Kumar Rajak shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before the trial Court concerned on 04.01.2023 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, I.A. No.19556/2021 is allowed in part. List for final hearing in due course.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA (SMT. ANJULI PALO) SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.08.01 17:21:21 IST JUDGE

ks

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.08.01 17:21:21 IST