Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajkumar And Raju Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 February, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 55 of 2016
(RAJKUMAR AND RAJU BAGHEL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 03-02-2022
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri K.S.Jha, learned counsel for the appellant Rajesh Baghel.
Shri Dilip Parihar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Shri Vishal Daniel, learned counsel for objector.
Heard on I.A. No.3927/2021, an application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail of appellant No.2 Rajesh Baghel is taken up.
The present appellant has been convicted under Section 294 of the
I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for three months, under Section 302 of
the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs.50,000/-,
under Section 323 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year and
fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 506 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to
undergo RI for one year, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant by taking this Court to the
prosecution story submits that the incident had taken place on 22/03/2008 in
two spells. As per the said story, the appellant participated in the first spell
and allegedly assaulted the deceased by means of a lathi on his head.
However, Umrao (deceased) left the said place on a motorcycle and in the
second spell, he was assaulted by other persons including main accused
Santosh. Santosh was given benefit of suspension of sentence on 13/01/2022
in CRA No.57/2016. The present appellant remained in custody from the date
of judgment i.e. 26/12/2015. The final hearing of this appeal will take time.
The remaining jail sentence of this appellant may be suspended.
The prayer is opposed by Shri Dilip Parihar, learned Panel Lawyer for
the respondent/State and Shri Vishal Daniel, learned counsel for the objector.
It is common ground that although incident has taken place in two spells, the
reason of death is cumulative effect of assault by the present appellant as well
as Santosh. In this backdrop, the application may be dismissed.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties on this aspect, and
perused the record and the objection.
Considering the nature of accusation coupled with the fact that the
appellant remained in custody for about six years and final hearing of this
appeal is not possible in near future, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of the present appellant, more so when the main
accused has already been given the said benefit.
Subject to depositing the fine amount, (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended.
Accordingly, aforesaid IA is allowed. The execution of jail sentence
of appellant Rajesh Baghel is hereby suspended and it is directed that the
appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with a further direction to
appear before the trial Court, Seoni o n 22.07.2022 and also on such
other dates, as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (ARUN KUMAR SHARMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
manju
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY
Date: 2022.02.04 15:36:29 IST
