Shahrukh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1109 MP

1                           Cr.A.No.9477/2019
                        (Shahrukh Vs. State of M.P.)

Indore : Dated 24.1.2022
      Shri Ashish Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Shri   Sachin     Jaiswal,   learned    Panel    Lawyer    for   the
respondent/State.

Heard through video conferencing.

Heard on I.A.No.28540/2021, fourth application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C.for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 324(one count) of IPC and sentenced to undergo one year RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction dated 24.10.2019 passed by Special Judge, Barwani, District Barwani in S.T.No.31/2016.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that his first application filed under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. was dismissed on merits vide order dated 8.1.2020, while second application filed under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty renew his prayer after completion of the actual half custodial sentence of the appellant and third application filed under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.was dismissed as withdrawn.

Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that appellant has suffered more than half of his custodial sentence, therefore, this fourth application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.has been filed. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that as per prosecution case appellant was found liable for one grievous injury caused to Israr and one simple injury to Mohsin. Both of them entered into a compromise with the appellant and have no objection in suspending the remaining period of custodial sentence of the appellant. Offence alleged against appellant at the most comes under Section 324 of IPC. There is no likelihood of early conclusion of the trial. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances prays

(Shahrukh Vs. State of M.P.)

for suspension of sentence and enlargement of appellant on bail, on such terms and conditions this Court deems fit and proper.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposed the application and submits that appellant is main accused in the matter, who caused grievous injury to Israr and looking to the nature of offence he is not entitled for bail.

Having considered the period of incarceration already suffered by the appellant, which is more than half of the period of custodial sentence and also considering the fact that there is no likelihood of early conclusion of the trial, but without commenting on merits of the case application is allowed.

It is directed that jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court on 7.3.2022 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

Accordingly, the IA stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Satyendra Kumar Singh) Judge

Patil

Digitally signed by SHAILESH PATIL Date: 2022.01.24 17:09:22 +05'30'