Mayur Kedare @ Vikki vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1771 MP

                                     1
          The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   CRA No. 2902 of 2020
                 (MAYUR KEDARE @ VIKKI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 08-02-2022
         Heard through Video Conferencing.

         Mr. Siddharth Datt, learned counsel for the appellant Mayur Kedare @
Vikki.
         Ms. Nalini Gurang, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.1332/2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail of appellant is taken up.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs.1000/-, under Section 307/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, with default stipulation.

Shri Datt, learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is in custody since date of judgment. He remained in custody for about six months during trial. As per prosecution story, the appellant was driving a motorcycle whereas co-accused Rajesh Upadhyay was sitting on the rear seat. Rajesh Upadhyay used a pistol and fired two persons because of which Sunil died

and another person/complainant Aadesh Bhadauriya was injured. It is submitted that name of present appellant does not find place in the FIR. There is no evidence whatsoever to establish that the present appellant was even aware that Rajesh Upadhyay was carrying a pistol and had an intention to used it against anybody. There is no enmity between the present appellant and injured and the deceased person. Aadesh Bhadauriya (PW-1) categorically admitted that present appellant was not personally known to him. There is no iota of evidence to establish meeting of mind between the present appellant and the co-accused person namely Rajesh Upadhyay. Thus, basic ingredients for attracting section 34 of IPC are missing. Reliance is placed on Kashmira Singh vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1994 SC 1651 and Mithu Singh vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2001 SC 1929.

Ms. Nalini Gurang, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State by placing reliance on para 18, 19, 20 and 45 of the impugned judgment submits that present appellant took Rajesh Upadhyay with him and after the incident also carried Rajesh Upadhyay with him. This shows his common intention.

In the aforesaid backdrop, a case is made out for suspension of

sentence for present appellant. Considering his limited role and without expressing any conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the present appellant.

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 o f appellant Mayur Kedare @ Vikki 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.30,000/- (Rupees thirty 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, Bhopal on 29.08.2022 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: 2022.02.09 14:31:59 IST