Rajesh Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 641 MP

                                 1
                                                               CRA-6014-2021




          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            CRA-6014-2021
         (Rajesh Mishra and others vs The State of Madhya Pradesh)

Jabalpur, Dated 13.01.2022

        Heard through Video Conferencing.
        Shri Anoop Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the appellants.
        Shri Amit Garg, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on admission.

Record perused.

The appeal appears to be arguable, hence, admitted for hearing. I.A. No.18238/2021 is taken up.

This is the first application under Section 389(1) of CrPC for suspension of sentence of the appellants/applicants No.2 and 3 namely Pappu @ Ramhridesh and Sunil who stand convicted and have been awarded punishment as under :

     Convicted under                      Sentenced to
         Section
      323/34 of IPC       undergo R.I. for 6 months and to pay fine of

Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer R.I. for 1 month.

326/34 of IPC undergo R.I. for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer R.I. for 6 months Both the sentences shall run concurrently

2. The ld. counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are real brothers and they are the son of applicant No.1-Rajesh Mishra. Both the parties are farmer families who are neighbours and have their farm lands adjacent to each other. There was a Mahua tree standing on the land of the applicants with some of its branches spreading over the land of the complainant. On the date of the incident, the complainant had cut some of its branches and he was taking their wood. When objected by the applicants and their father, they assaulted and falsely implicated them in this case. Both the applicants were not having any deadly weapon. There is no serious allegation against them except that

CRA-6014-2021

they beat the complainant by stick and kicks & fists. There is no allegation that they have caused injury to Halkai who allegedly sustained grievous injury. Their conviction under Section 326 IPC is based on the principle of common intention. During trial, the applicants were on bail and they have never misused the liberty so granted. The applicants have served out about 6 months in jail. The appeal would take time to be heard finally. Therefore, their sentence may be suspended.

3. The ld. counsel for the applicants further submitted that Dr Satyendra Kumar Gupta (PW8) who had examined both the injured namely Jugal Kishore and Halkai, have observed only lacerated wound on the head of Halkai which, according to him, was caused by hard and blunt object. The X-ray plate has not been proved before the trial Court. Referring to para 39 of the impugned judgment, it is contended that the trial Court itself has not found the seizure of ballam and lathi proved.

4. The State has opposed the prayer.

5. According to the prosecution case, on the date of incident i.e. on 20.04.2020, on account of some previous enmity, father and sons (the applicants) assaulted the victims. Applicant Sunil gave a blow of stick on the left elbow of complainant Jugal Kishore while applicant Pappu @ Ramhridesh beat him by fists and kicks. When Halkai, the brother of complainant Jugal Kishore, came forward to rescue him, applicants' father Rajesh Mishra gave a blow of ballam on his head. A depressed fracture on frontal bone of scalp was observed in X-ray examination.

6. On due consideration of the nature of respective allegations found proved against the applicants and the material available on record, I.A. No.18238/2021 deserves to be and is hereby allowed.

7. It is directed that on deposition of fine amount and also on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the

CRA-6014-2021

satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 19.04.2022 and on all other subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this behalf, the execution of substantial jail sentence imposed on the appellants/applicants No.2 and 3 viz. Pappu @ Ramhridesh and Sunil shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.

8. List this case for final hearing in due course.

(Virender Singh) JUDGE vinod Digitally signed by VINOD VISHWAKARMA Date: 2022.01.14 10:48:05 +05'30'