Teerath Prajapati vs The State Of M.P
2022 Latest Caselaw 2285 MP

                                                                              1
                                                 The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                          CRA No. 4376 of 2021
                                                           (TEERATH PRAJAPATI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF M.P)

                                      Jabalpur, Dated : 18-02-2022
                                            Shri Sharad Verma, learned counsel for the appellants.

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

I A. No.15956/2021, first application u/S.389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence moved on behalf of appellant No.2 to 6, is taken up and considered along with reply of the State.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on said I.A.

This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 19.07.2021 passed in S.T. No.54/2020 by Additional Sessions Judge, Pawai, District Panna (M.P.), whereby appellant No.2 to 6 have been convicted u/S.302 and 120-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellant No.2 to 6 have been convicted on the strength of evidence, which cannot sustain conviction having found guilty under the established principle of Criminal Jurisprudence.

Learned counsel for the appellant has taken this Court to facts, circumstances and the findings recorded by the Court below and has held that

apart from the appellant No.1, who was weilding a sharp cutting weapon in his hand, there is no cogent evidence against appellant No.2 to 6 worthy of credence. It is submitted that PW/2 Mulayam Bai, wife of deceased and PW/3 Kunwar Lal are stated to have seen the appellant No.2 to 6 alongwith appellant No.1. It is submitted that only bamboo sticks were recovered from appellant No.2 to 6 whereas cause of death is found to be injury caused by sharp cutting object.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State referring to various paragraphs of impugned judgment submits that though appellant No.2 to 6 have not caused fatal injury, but were part of an unlawful assembly with weapons in their hands alongwith main assailant i.e. appellant No.1 by PW/2, 3 and 4 running away from the seen of crime.

Signature Not Verified SAN After having considered the submissions of counsel for the rival parties and Digitally signed by MOHAMMED MOHSIN QURESHI Date: 2022.02.23 10:19:27 IST having perused the record and also having taken note of the fact that appellant

No.2 to 6 have suffered only nine months of incarceration against life imprisonment imposed, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to suspend the sentence of appellant No.2 to 6 for the time being.

Accordingly, said I.A. stands dismissed.

                                         (SHEEL NAGU)                                      (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
                                             JUDGE                                                JUDGE

                                      mohsin




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by MOHAMMED MOHSIN
QURESHI
Date: 2022.02.23 10:19:27 IST