Anil @ Annu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1699 MP

                                  1
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                 CRA No. 8166 of 2019
                  (ANIL @ ANNU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 07-02-2022
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Siddharth Datt, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Shri Dilip Parihar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Record has been received.

Heard on admission.

Appeal is admitted for hearing.

Heard o n I.A. No.20026/2019, which is first application under Section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant Anil @ Annu, who stands convicted under Sections 302/34, 307/34 (on two counts), 324/34 (one two counts) and 323/34 (on two counts) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, RI for ten years on each count, RI for one year on each count and RI for six months respectively and to pay fine amounts of Rs.1,000/- for each offence with usual default stipulation vide judgment dated 11/09/2019 passed in S.T.No.103/2016 by Fifth Additional Session Judge, Chhindwara District -

Chhindwara.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has caused injuries to injured Mahesh on thigh with knife, which is not found grievous in nature or dangerous for life, however, the injured Mahesh has not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. It is also submitted that there is no allegation against the appellant for causing any injury on deceased, therefore, no offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC is made out against him. It is further submitted that the trial court has committed error in convicting the appellant without appreciating the evidence in proper perspective. The case of the prosecution is based upon conjectures and surmises. There is no direct evidence against the appellant connecting him with the alleged offence. Necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 302 of IPC are

completely missing. During trial the appellant was on bail and he did not misuse the liberty so granted to him. The appellant has completed more than 3 years in jail and final hearing of this appeal will take a long time in this Covid Pandemic Era. Hence, the remaining jail sentence of present appellant may be suspended.

The prayer is opposed by Shri Parihar, learned Panel Lawyer on the

basis of the written objection.

Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties coupled with the fact that although it is alleged that the appellant has caused injuries to injured Mahesh on thigh with knife, which is not found grievous in nature or dangerous for life, however, the injured Mahesh has not supported the prosecution case and there is no allegation against the appellant for causing any injury to deceased but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is allowed. It is directed that subject to payment of fine amount, if not already paid, the execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and she shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond for the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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, Chhindwara on 22.06.2022 and such further dates as may be fixed in this regard.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                          (SUJOY PAUL)                                    (ARUN KUMAR SHARMA)
                                             JUDGE                                               JUDGE

                                    skt




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR
TIWARI
Date: 2022.02.08 14:35:47 IST