Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balveer vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 June, 2022
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1166 of 2014
(BALVEER Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 20-06-2022
Shri M.K. Chaudhri, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri R.K. Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Heard o n I.A.No.22435/2021, third repeat application under section
389(1) Cr.P.C., seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf
of the appellant. His first application (IA.2662/2015) was dismissed as
withdrawn vide order dated 09.07.2015 with liberty to revive prayer at
subsequent stage on availability of some additional grounds or material change
in the circumstances whereas his second repeat application (IA.3794/2017) was
dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.06.2017.
Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to
suffer life rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default
stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.10.2014
in Sessions Trial No.440/2013 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dabra
District Gwalior.
As per prosecution story, deceased-Rani was the wife of sole appellant,
who was working at a brick kiln. In the intervening night of 02.06.2013 and
03.06.2013 at about 1:00 to 2:00 AM while he asked the deceased-Rani to cook
food for him, a quarrel took place. He allegedly got infuriated and had
repeatedly beaten her with a wooden stick (lathi) causing injury in parietal bone
and other parts of the body. Because of repeated blows on parietal region
causing two injuries on parietal bone, one injury on occipital bone and two
injuries on face and other parts of body. Thereafter he had taken her to the
house of brother-in-law of deceased, Dinesh. Thereafter, she passed away. As
per post mortem report and the ocular evidence of Dr. Gajraj Gupta (PW/12),
death had occurred due to head injuries caused by hard and blunt object.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment
suffers from patent illegality and perversity. Relevant evidence has not taken
into consideration. Judgment as such is based on surmises and conjectures
inasmuch as all prosecution witnesses have turned hostile and belied story of
prosecution. Even otherwise, appellant is in custody for over nine years. His
children are without shelter and are only dependent on relatives. The appeal is
of the year 2014 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of appeal. In any
case, in the obtaining facts and circumstances appellant could not have been
convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC in-fact accepting the story
of the prosecution in toto at the most it is a case of offence under Section 304
Part-II of IPC as neither there was any premeditation of mind or intention to
cause homicidal death of the deceased. Hence, prays for suspension of
sentence
Per contra, learned counsel for the State while supporting the impugned
judgment refers to para 10,11,17 etc. submits that the death caused was
homicidal in nature due to head injury caused by hard and blunt object i.e. lathi
with blood stains recovered from the appellant. As such no exception can be
taken in the matter of suspension. However, he does not dispute that the
appellant does not have criminal antecedents and has already suffered nine
months of incarceration.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case but regard being had to the fact that the appellant is in jail since 04.06.2013
with no criminal antecedents, but without commenting upon the merits o f the
case, this Court is of the view that the application deserves to be and is hereby
allowed. It is directed that execution of jail sentence of the appellant shall remain
suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail
subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One
Lac Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Trial Court and also subject to deposit of the fine amount (if not already
deposited) for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 25/07/2022,
and on further dates as may be directed by the Registry in that regard, with
following further conditions:
(i) 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 appellant, his medical examination be conducted through
the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that they are having
any symptoms 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, I.A.No.22435/2021 stands allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
neetu
NEETU
SHASHANK
2022.06.21
17:43:54
+05'30'
