Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ambaram And Anr. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 January, 2022
Author: Vivek Rusia
-: 1 :-
CRA. No. 509/2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE
DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA)
CRA. No. 509/2013
(Ambaram S/o. Magilala & another V/s. State of M.P.)
Date : 24.01.2022 :
Shri A.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the appellant No.2 - Basliya.
Shri Sudhanshu Vyas, learned counsel for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.28769/2021, a repeat (8th) application u/s. 389 of the
Cr.P.C. for suspension of custodial sentence. Vide judgment dated 3,4,2013
passed by Sessions Judge, Dhar in S.T. No.376/2012, the appellant - Basliya
and another have been convicted u/s. 302/34 of the IPC and sentenced to
undergo life imprisonment.
As per prosecution story, on 8.6.2012, complainant Munna S/o.
Devisingh Bhil gave an information at Police Station Tirla, District Dhar that
he along with others was cultivating the agricultural field. At that time,
Gopiya, Ambaram and Basliya of Village Umarkua came there and started
abusing by filthy language one of them viz. Ratan. Munna and and Muliya
tried to convince them but Ambaram with an intention to kill pelted stone on
Muliya which hit on his stomach. Muliya ran away from the place then
Basliya and Gopiya pelted the stones on his back. Muliya fell down and he
was taken to the hospital where he was declared as dead. The postmortem
was carried out and it was found that due to the second stone pelted the ribs
were fractured and the livery was punctured. The police arrested all the three
accused and filed the charge-sheet. Vide judgment dated 3.4.2013, learned
Sessions Judge acquitted the accused Gopiya but convicted and sentenced
the present appellant and Ambaram, as aforesaid.
Vide order dated 13.6.2013, the first application of suspension of
sentence of appellant No.2 - Basliya was dismissed as withdrawn with a
liberty to file fresh application after a period of six months and granted the
bail to appellant No.1 - Ambaram. Thereafter, all the applications of
appellant No.2 were dismissed.
Learned counsel for the appellant No.2 - Basliya submits that there
CRA. No. 509/2013
was no intention to kill the deceased. The stones were thrown
unintentionally. One stone has caused fracture, therefore, the offence would
not travel more than Section 304 Part II of the IPC for which the appellant
has already undergone more than 9 years' incarceration. The dispute arose all
of a sudden without pre-meditation. The allegation against all the three
accused are the same, out of which, one has been acquitted and another has
been released on bail in the year 2013. There is no likelihood of final hearing
of this appeal in near future. He, therefore, prayed for grant of bail to
appellant No.2 - Basliya.
On the other hand, learned Panel Advocate appearing for the
respondent/State opposes the prayer and prayed for rejection of the repeat
application for suspension of sentence.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and
looking to the period of custody of the appellant - Basliya, without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, in the opinion of this Court,
he is entitled to be released on bail.
Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.28769/2021) is allowed and it is
directed that upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/-
(Rupees Forty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this
Court, the execution of custodial part of the sentence of appellant - Basliya
shall remain suspended till the final disposal of this appeal. The appellant
after being released on bail shall mark his presence before the Registry of
this Court on 20.09.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed
in this behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.
Before releasing the appellant from the custody, the Jail Authorities
are directed to medically examine him in order to rule out the possibility of
COVID-19 infection and shall comply with the direction given by the Apex
Court in Writ Petition No.01/2020.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
( VIVEK RUSIA ) ( PRANAY VERMA )
JUDGE. JUDGE.
Alok/-
ALOK
Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya
Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=eae18b7018e4245a54c74948bb27999d7e0525268640
65b20b27a5804a3e1fea,
GARGAV
pseudonym=7CDEDE27CC58A5C0E24DE6046DC50DE017D631
F3,
serialNumber=9995A79B765CF420033A1CBAAFF5461F718D61
8BA2FDCA70E412F27FFE6E8CB0, cn=ALOK GARGAV
Date: 2022.01.28 16:03:45 +05'30'
