Shahjad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 906 MP

                                   1




            THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                    Criminal Appeal No.7219-2021
              (Shahjad & Anr. vs State of Madhya Pradesh)

Jabalpur, Dated 19/01/2022.

        Shri Ghanshyam Sharma,counsel for the appellants.
        Shri Saurabh Shukla, Panel Lawyer for the State.
        Heard on admission.
        Admit.
        Record is perused.
1.

Heard on I.A. No.21369/2021, which is an application under Section 389(1) of CrPC for suspension of custodial sentence on behalf of appellants.

2. The applicants have been convicted and sentenced as under-

     Convicted under                        Sentenced to
         Section
        307 IPC          Undergo R.I. for 5 years and to pay fine of

Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer R.I. for 6 months.

25(1-B) (B) of Undergo R.I. for 1 year and to pay fine of the Arms Act Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer R.I. for 3 months.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P.-4) has been lodged against unknown persons. Eyewitness Sheru & Sohel (P.W-3) has not supported the prosecution case. He further referred to the statement of Mohd. Haseed (P.W-4), who has admitted that he was not aware with the names of the offenders, who assaulted the victim. Learned counsel referred to para 5 of victim Raees (P.W-2), wherein he has admitted that at the time of incident after sustaining injury he lost consciousness. In reply to the question put before him, he admitted that he is not aware as to how he sustained injury and who had caused him injury, but immediately

thereafter he explained that he could not understand the question, therefore, could not reply properly.

4. It is argued that Dr. Shoranki (P.W-12) has admitted in para 5 of his cross-examination that the injuries of injured were not dangerous to life. Despite all this, the trial Court has wrongly convicted the applicants, but the appeal would take time. During trial they were on bail and have not misused the liberty granted to them. Therefore, they may be granted suspension of sentence.

5. In reply, Ld. P.L. referred to para 9,14, 17 and 26 of the impugned judgment and submitted that as many as 7 stabbed and incised wounds have been detected by Dr. Shoranki (P.W-12) and Dr.Virendra (P.W-9) and their statements have not been challenged. Repeated blows given by sharp knife itself is sufficient to show the impact and intention of the offenders. The knifes have been seized from both the applicants and author of the FIR was not acquainted with the offenders and injured fell unconscious, therefore, Dehati Nalishi does not contain the name of offenders, but the entire incident is very well mentioned in Dehati Nalishi. The injured himself has categorically deposed before the Court on oath making allegation against the applicant and his testimony has remained intact in the cross- examination. The prosecution has established a case by producing convincing evidence, which has been apparently appreciated by the trial Court, therefore, the application may be dismissed.

6. At this stage, counsel for the applicants seeks permission to withdraw the application.

Prayer is allowed.

I.A. No.21369/2021 is dismissed as withdrawn. List the case for final hearing in due course.

(Virender Singh) Judge rv Digitally signed by REENA HIMANSHU SHARMA Date: 2022.01.25 10:44:38 +05'30'