Bhika vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 16166 MP

                                                                 1
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                        AT INDORE
                                                          CRA No. 9134 of 2022
                                               (BHIKA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 06-12-2022
                                     Shri Pankaj Ajmera, learned counsel for the appellants.

                                     Shri Rajesh Joshi, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent No.1

/State.

Shri Nilesh Sharma, learned counsel for the objector.

Heard on the question of admission.

Admit.

Also heard on IA No.13441/2022, which is an application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C.,1973 for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to appellants - Bhika, Vivek and Sakubai.

Learned Trial Court has convicted the appellants under Sections 306 r/w 149 of IPC and sentenced them, to undergo RI for 07 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- each with default stipulations vide judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.09.2022 passed by the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sendhwa Distt. Barwani in S.T. No.67/2020.

Learned counsel for appellants referring FIR dated 18.06.2020 (Ex.P-1) lodged by the deceased as well as FIR dated 18.06.2020 (Ex.P-13) lodged by the appellant (Vandana Mahale) submits that admittedly before the incident on 18.06.2020 a quarrel took place between the appellants and deceased's family for constructing a wall. He further referring the statements of deceased's wife (PW-1) submits that admittedly after the aforesaid incident there were no dispute between the appellants and deceased. Deceased's wife (PW-1) in Para 18 of her cross-examination specifically admitted that on 19.06.2020 and Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 12/7/2022 10:11:32 AM

20.06.2020, no quarrel took place between the deceased and appellants. Perusal of suicide notice (Ex.P-16 and P-17) said to be written by deceased specifically s tates about the acts of the appellants with regard to obstructing in constructions of wall and making harassment to the deceased in this regard. Learned counsel also submits that in view of all above incidents, ingredients of Section 306 of IPC do not attract in the matter as there was no immediate abatement or instigation to the deceased to commit suicide. Learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence placed on record and there is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. Hence, prays that application for suspension of sentence be allowed.

Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State as well as counsel for the objector referring suicide note (Ex.P-16 and P-17) written by the deceased submits that appellants were continuously harassing the deceased. They were threatening to implicate the deceased in false case of rape and to get terminated him from his service, due to their consistent pressure deceased committed suicide. O n the complaint made by the appellants, deceased was called in the police station and there also he was harassed. Learned counsel for the objector has relied the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of MP [LAWS(SC) 2002 5 55] t o bolster his submissions. Offence alleged against the appellants are of serious in nature, therefore, no case is made out for grant of bail to them.

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record. Upon perusal of record, it is apparent that there was a dispute between the appellants and deceased's family with regard to constructions of a wall and both the parties have made allegations against each other. On 18.06.2020 both

Signature Not Verified the parties lodged FIR against each other. Admittedly, deceased was missing on Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 12/7/2022 10:11:32 AM

20.06.2020. In view of all these facts and considering the nature of allegations and the fact that in between 19.06.2020 and 20.06.2020, there were no quarrel took place between the appellants and deceased, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I.A.No.13441/2022 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellants shall remain suspended.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited, they shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with a solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court, for their appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 16.01.2023 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

List for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy, as per Rules.

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE

Vibha

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 12/7/2022 10:11:32 AM