Karanlal Bhannare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 9247 MP

                                                                           1
                                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                                   CRA No. 6414 of 2021
                                                       (KARANLAL BHANNARE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                      Dated : 09-07-2022
                                             Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate with Shri Pawan Gujar, Advocate for

                                      the appellant.
                                             Shri Pradeep Gupta, GA for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.3405/2022, which is an application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of the custodial sentence passed against appellant Karanlal Bhannare and release him on bail.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 15/09/2021 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Junnardeo, District Chhindwara in S.T.No.12/2019 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 458 & 304 Part I of IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- with default clause.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned trial court only on the basis of statement of Funda Bai (PW/3) found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offences. The name of the appellant is not mentioned in the FIR. Even

in the case diary statement of Funda Bai (PW/3) also, the name of the appellant is not mentioned. It is alleged that after the incident in a test identification parade Funda Bai (PW/3) identified the appellant as an accused but in this regard there are many contradiction and omission in the statement of Funda Bai (PW/3). She clearly admitted in her cross-examination that she saw the appellant in the police Signature Not Verified SAN station and police took her along with the appellant in a school where she Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.07.09 18:00:20 IST identified the appellant so that identification became doubtful. It is also alleged

that police seized blood stained clothes from the possession of the appellant but the witness of that seizure memo (Exhibit P/10) i.e., Gulab Singh (PW/4) and Naman (PW/5) did not support the prosecution story. Even in the FSL report only it is mentioned that human blood was found on the seized clothes but there is no evidence on record to show that the blood group of said human blood found on the clothes was matched with the blood group of the deceased Laxminarayan. Learned trial Court without appreciating all these evidence properly, wrongly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences. He further submitted that appellant is in custody since 20/01/2019. Hence, prayed for suspension of the jail sentence and release of the appellant on bail since the

hearing of this appeal will take time.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted from the prosecution evidence the guilt of the appellant is clearly proved, so the learned trial Court did not commit any mistake in finding the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offences, so the sentence of the appellant should not be suspended.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, contention of learned counsel of the appellant and the fact that the appellant is in custody since 20/01/2019 and according to listing policy the hearing of this appeal will take time, the application filed by the appellant is allowed and it is directed that the execution of the jail sentence alone passed against the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 14/12/2022 and on such Signature Not Verified SAN

further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry during the pendency Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.07.09 18:00:20 IST

of this appeal.

The appeal has already been admitted for final hearing, so it be listed for final hearing in due course.

C.C. on payment of usual charges.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

(ra)

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.07.09 18:00:20 IST