Santosh Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1749 MP

                The High Court of Madhya Pradesh
                       Cr.A. No. 4946 / 2021

                (Santosh Sahu vs. The State of M.P.)

Jabalpur Dated 08.02.2022

      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Kamal Bhan Vishwakarma, learned counsel for appellant.

      Shri Jubin Prasad, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

Record of the trial Court is received and the same is perused.

I.A. No. 18166/2021, first application for suspension of sentence moved on behalf of appellant Santosh Sahu u/Sec. 389(1) Cr.P.C. is taken up and considered along with the reply of the State.

This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 14.07.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No. 168/2017 by Fourth Sessions Judge, Sidhi, (M.P.), whereby appellant has been convicted as under :-

    Section          Imprisonment            Fine        Default Sentence
  U/s 302 IPC      Life Imprisonment      Rs.1,000/-      RI for 1 month
  U/s 302 IPC      Life Imprisonment       Rs.1,000/      RI for 1 month

The prosecution case in brief is that the complainant- Chandravati Sahu lodged a written report at Police Station Churhat Semariya, District Sidhi (M.P.) stating therein that on 13.10.2017 at about 6:00 pm, her sister-in-law (bhabhi) came to her house informing that she had left her house at about 5.00 pm for the purpose of taking fodder from the farm land leaving behind her husband-present appellant, daughter-Rajkumari Sahu (since deceased) and father-in-law- Dulare Sahu (since deceased) in the house. On returning back, she found the door of the house was closed from inside and on her call

when the door was opened by the present appellant/accused, she found the dead bodies of her daughter Rajkumari and father-in-law Dulare Sahu, lying in a pool of blood. The present appellant was roaming around ascribing that his father was very offensive towards him and always used to abuse him, due to which he had assaulted him with an axe (basula) and killed him. He also killed his daughter with axe when she tried to save her grandfather. Thereafter a case was registered at Crime No.438/2017 by Police Station, Chowki Semariya, District Sidhi against the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He is under judicial custody since 13.10.2017. He has further submitted that there was no eye- witness to the incident and the case is purely based on circumstantial evidence. He further submits that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, it has been prayed that the jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he be released on bail.

On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the bail application and in support of his contention has placed reliance in the case of Trimukh Maroti Kirkan vs. State of Maharashtra, (2006) 10 SCC 681, whereby the Apex Court in respect of an offence committed within the four wall of the home has held thus,

"15. Where an offence like murder is committed in secrecy inside a house, the initial burden to establish the case would undoubtedly be upon the prosecution, but the nature and amount of evidence to be led by it to establish the charge cannot be of the same degree as is required in other cases of circumstantial evidence. The burden would be of a comparatively lighter character. In view of Section 106 of the Evidence Act there will be a corresponding burden on the inmates of the house to give a cogent explanation as to how the crime was committed. The inmates of the house cannot get away by simply keeping quiet and offering no explanation on the supposed premise that the burden to establish its case lies entirely upon the prosecution and there is no duty at all on an accused to offer any explanation." Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On perusal of record, it is proved that the bodies of deceased Dulare and Raj Kumari were found inside the house where the present

appellant/accused was residing with them. On the basis of the medical evidence, it is also proved that the death of the deceased persons were homicidal in nature. The weapon used to commit the crime was also recovered from the possession of the appellant/accused.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety and looking to the gravity of the offence committed by the appellant, we do not find it a fit case to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant.

Consequently, I.A. No.18166/2021 is dismissed.

Let the appeal be listed for final hearing in due course.

(SHEEL NAGU)                                         (SUNITA YADAV)
  JUDGE                                                  JUDGE


ss /-



  SWETA SAHU
  2022.02.14 16:50:00
  +05'30'