Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 June, 2022
Author: Anjuli Palo
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4613 of 2022
(RAHUL PATEL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 24-06-2022
Mr. Dinesh Prasad Patel, learned counsel for the appellants.
Mr. Narendra Lodhi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
The appeal seems to be arguable, hence admitted for hearing.
Heard on I.A. No.9465/2022 which is first application filed on behalf of the
appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the appellants prays for withdrawal of aforesaid application so
far as the appellant No.2 - Rambali Patel is concerned.
Accordingly, I.A. No.9465/2022 is dismissed so far as appellant No.2 - Rambali
Patel is concerned.
The appellants No.3 and 4 have been convicted by the impugned judgment dated
13.05.2022 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Amarpatan, district - Satna
in ST No.50/2020 for offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304B of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and have been sentenced to
undergo SI for 3 years (fine Rs.1,000/-) , SI for 7 years (Rs.1,000/-) and SI for 2 years
(fine Rs.1,000/-), respectively with default stipulation.
S o far as the appellants No.3 and 4 are concerned, learned counsel for the
appellants has submitted that the appellants 3 and 4 are uncle-in-law and aunt-in-law
(chacha sasur and chachi sas) of Chetna (since deceased). It is contended that except
that they are relatives of the main accused, they have no nexus with the family matters of
Signature Not Verified
SAN the deceased and her husband. It is further contended that they are already residing
SHARAN SHUKLA separately from the family of husband of the deceased. No role is attributed to them in
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
Date: 2022.06.24 17:24:07 IST
commission of crime. The appellants are in custody and disposal of this appeal would
take considerable time, therefore, the custodial sentence of the appellant may be
suspended and they may be released on bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The father of
the deceased admitted in his cross-examination in paragraph 10 that he has nothing stated
against chacha sasur and chachi sas of the deceased regarding demand of dowry. Hence,
looking to the role of the appellants, I deem it to be a fit case to suspend the custodial
sentence of the appellants 3 and 4 and to release them on bail, therefore, without
commenting on the merit, this application is allowed in part.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited
and on furnishing a personal bond each in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
only) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
concerned, the custodial sentence of appellant No.3- Ramphali @ Ramphal Patel
and appellant No.4- Smt. Duasiya @ Duasa Patel shall remain suspended and they
shall be released on bail for securing their presence before the concerned trial Court on
07.11.2022 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of
this appeal. The appellants 3 and 4 shall regularly appear before the concerned trial
Court on each and every date, as may be directed by that court without fail.
Accordingly, the application I.A. No.9465/2022 is allowed in part. It is dismissed
as withdrawn in respect of the appellant No.2 - Rambali Patel. It is allowed so far as
appellant No.3 - Ramphali @ Ramphal and appellant No.4 - Smt. Duasiya @ Duasa Patel
are concerned.
List the case for final hearing in due course.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2022.06.24 17:24:07 IST
(SMT. ANJULI PALO)
JUDGE
ks
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2022.06.24 17:24:07 IST
