Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dhanpal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 July, 2022
Author: Sunita Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 2393 of 2022
(DHANPAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-07-2022
Mr. Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants.
Mr. R.K. Awasthi, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Heard on I.A. No. 8055 of 2022, which is first application under
Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant No.3 Shishupal.
This Criminal Appeal assails the judgment dated 22.02.2022 passed in
ST No.44/2017 by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Guna (M.P.) whereby the
appellant No.3 stands convicted under Section 307/34 of IPC and sentenced
him to undergo 7 years RI with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and under Section 323/34
(two counts) and sentenced him to undergo 6 months RI with a fine of
Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulations.
The prosecution story in brief is that on 28.09.2016 at about 5:30 am, the
complainant Balwant Singh along with his sons Rajesh and Dinesh went to the
farm to see soyabeen crop. At that time, the accused persons including the
present appellant No.3/Shishupal armed with lathi and farsa started abusing the
complainant party. When the complainant asked them not to abuse then
accused persons started beating them. Rajendra gave a farsa blow on the head
of Dinesh. Shishupal inflicted injury on the hand and leg of the injured.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the trial Court has
wrongly convicted the appellant No.3 without proper appreciation of facts of
the case. It is further argued that learned trial Court has held that it is a case of
ownership and possession and it was the complainant party who entered into
the property of accused persons. It is further argued that a cross-case has also
been registered against the complainant party on the report of accused persons
in respect to this incident which is registered as S.T.No.77/2018, in which the
trial Court by its judgment dated 22.02.2022 convicted the complainant party.
Learned counsel for the appellants further argued that since it is a case of free
fight, therefore, he placed reliance on the judgment of Puran Singh and others
Vs. The State of Punjab reported in AIR 1975 SC 1674 and Pathubha
Govindji Rathod and another Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2015 (4)
SCC 363, where every individual is responsible for his own act and as per the
prosecution story, the present appellant was also having lathi and inflicted
simple injury to the injured. Therefore, he cannot be held liable to committing
the offence of attempt to murder. The appellant was on bail during trial and he
has not misused the liberty granted to him. Final hearing of this appeal will take
long time. Hence, prayed to suspend the jail sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant No.3.
Counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for
its rejection.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available
on record.
Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties,
but without commenting on merits of the case, I.A.No. 8055 of 2022 is hereby
allowed. Subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on
furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with
a solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial
Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant No.3 - Shishupal shall
remain suspended and he be released on bail. The appellant is further directed
to mark his appearance before the Office of this Court on 10.08.2022 and on
subsequent dates given by the Office in this regard, till final disposal of this
appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for
compliance.
Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
bj/-
BARKHA SHARMA
2022.07.11
17:34:26 +05'30'
