Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lal Singh Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. on 13 June, 2022
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 338 of 2015
(LAL SINGH JATAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.)
Dated : 13-06-2022
Shri A.K. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent-State.
Heard on IA.32428/2021, tenth application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant seeking suspension of sentence and grant of
bail.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation vide
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24/03/2015 passed by
Additional Sessions Judge Sevda, District-Datia in Sessions Case No.94/2014.
As per prosecution story, appellant was married to the deceased Sadhna
on 25/12/2013. On the fateful day i.e. 08/05/2014, while appellant and other
family members were sleeping in the courtyard, at about 1 pm in the night, there
was sudden screaming of the deceased Sadhna who was in another room. As a
result, appellant and other family members woke up and rush to the room of the
deceased and broke open the door and it was found that deceased Sadhna
suffered burn injuries. Thereafter, fire was extinguished by them and an
intimation was also given to the concerned police station about the incident by
the appellant. Despite treatment, deceased Sadhna could not survive and
passed away.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and
has been falsely implicated. Appellant has suffered jail incarceration for over 08
years i.e. since 08/05/2014. The entire prosecution story was belied by the
prosecution witnesses examined during trial. The judgment of the trial Court
suffers from patent perversity and surmises and conjecture as well. Relevant
evidences have been ignored while convicting the appellant. On mere
presumption, appellant was found to have committed murder having burned the
deceased Sadhna who is said to have suffered homicidal death. Even
otherwise, appellant has already undergone almost 08 years of sentence. The
appeal is of the year 2015 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the
appeal. Under such circumstances, learned counsel prays for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
Per contra, Shri Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent-State while opposing the application referred to paragraph 24 and
26 of the impugned judgment to contend that the trial Court upon critical
analysis of the evidence placed on record, has rightly concluded complicity of
the appellant in the instant crime. Indeed, he fairly submits that the prosecution
witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the story of the prosecution at
the time of filing the final report.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting on merits of the contentions so advanced, but regard being
had to the fact that appellant has undergone jail sentence for over 08 years
having no criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood of early hearing of this
appeal in the near future, hence, in the obtaining facts and circumstances,
IA.32428/2021 deserves to be and is hereby allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant shall remain
suspended and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The appellant is directed to
appear before the Registry of this Court first on 12/07/2022 and on other
subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with following further
conditions:-
(i) the appellant will abide by the terms and conditions of
various circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and
the State Government as well as the local administration from to time
in the matter of maintaining social distancing, physical distancing,
hygiene, etc., to avoid proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-
19);
(ii) the concerned Jail Authorities are directed that before
releasing the appellant, the medical examination of the appellant be
conducted through the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that
he is having any symptom of COVID-19 then the consequential
follow up action including the isolation/quarantine or any further test
required be
undertaken immediately;
(iii) On violation of the conditions, State is free to apply for
cancellation of bail. Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and
disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2022.06.14
10:42:45 +05'30'
