Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 January, 2022
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
1
CRA No.587/2022
High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur
Bench at Indore
Criminal Appeal No.587/2022
Indore, Dated 19.01.2022
Hearing through Video Conferencing.
Shri Surendra Kumar Tuteja, learned counsel for appellant
No.1 Vinod s/o Santosh Patel, appellant No.2 Santosh s/o Umrao
Singh Patel, appellant No.3 Manohar Patel s/o Umrao Singh Patel,
appellant No.4 Munshilal s/o Umrao Singh, appellant No.5 Jitendra
s/o Munshilal Patel and appellant No.6 Kriparam s/o Man Singh
Patel.
Shri Sameer Verma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent /
State of Madhya Pradesh, on advance notice.
Heard on IA No.676/2022, first application under Section 389
(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of jail
sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellants.
The present appellants have been convicted and sentenced by
learned Special Judge (under SC / ST Act), Dewas, District Dewas
(MP) in Special Sessions Trial No.3500020/2016 vide judgment
dated 29th December, 2021, as under: -
Conviction Sentence
Section Act RI Fine Imprisonment in lieu of fine
amount
323 r/w IPC 1 year Rs.500/- 1 month RI
149 (for each on six
causing counts,
injuries to Total
injured Rs.18,000/-
persons
Tulrisam,
Hindu
CRA No.587/2022
Singh,
Atmaram,
Mukesh,
Rahul and
Arun
3 (2) (v-a) SC ST Act 1 year RI Rs.500/- 1 month RI
each on six
counts
Total
Rs.18,000/-
147 IPC 1 year RI Rs.1,000/- 1 month RI
each on six
counts
Total
Rs.6,000/-
Counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants
were on bail during the trial and they did not misuse the liberty so
granted to them. After conviction, the jail sentence of the appellants
has already been suspended by the trial Court itself up to 07.02.2022.
It is further submitted that short sentence of one year has been
imposed on each of the appellants and there are fair chances of
success in the appeal and there is no possibility of early disposal of
this appeal in near future and if the sentence is not suspended, then
the present appeal filed by the appellant (s) may turn infructuous.
Under these circumstances and looking to the short sentence
imposed on the appellants, counsel for the appellants prays for
suspension of jail sentence of the appellants and grant of bail to
them.
Counsel for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh, on the
other hand, opposed the application by submitting that no sufficient
ground is made out for releasing the appellants on bail; hence the
application filed by the appellants be dismissed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
CRA No.587/2022
arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties as also looking to
the short sentence of one year sentence awarded to them, this Court
is of the considered opinion that the application for suspension of
custodial sentence deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the
case, IA No.676/2022 is allowed, subject to depositing the fine
amount, if any, and it is directed that on furnishing a personal bond
by each of the appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for his / her regular appearance
before concerned trial Court, the execution of the custodial part of
the sentence imposed against the appellant (s) shall remain
suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.
The appellant (s), after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his /
her presence before the concerned trial Court on 11.05.2022 and on
all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in
this regard.
Let the record (physical) of the case from the concerned trial
Court be requisitioned; and list the matter on the question of
admission.
C. c. as per rules.
(Subodh Abhyankar)
Judge
rcp
RAMESH CHANDRA PITHWE
2022.01.19 17:38:35 +05'30'
