Manohar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8565 MP

                                                                        1
                                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                             AT INDORE
                                                                CRA No. 1992 of 2021
                                                          (MANOHAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   Dated : 28-06-2022
                                         Shri Manish Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                         Shri Shaswat Seth, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.5170/2022, which is an application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, for suspension of jail sentence moved on behalf of the appellant - Manohar.

Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section

307 and 332 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and RI for 01 year with fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.12.2020 passed in ST No. 413/2019.

Prosecution story in brief is that appellant Bhuri Bai alias Shyamubai made a complaint on Dial 100 at Police Station, Industrial Area, Dewas to the effect that her neighbour Manohar is hurling filthy abuses to her and when injured Rajendra Singh objected to the same, appellant assaulted him with sword due to which he suffered grievous injuries on his head and hands.

Accordingly case has been registered against the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He further referring to statement of Dr. Brijraj Shukla (PW-8) and MLC report (Ex. P-6) submits that injuries found on the body of the complainant were not grievous or dangerous to life. Trial Court Signature Not Verified SAN has committed error in holding the appellant guilty for the offences punishable Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN Date: 2022.06.28 18:31:38 IST u/Ss 307 and 332 of IPC. Even otherwise, appellant has suffered about 50%

of the jail sentence awarded to him as he is in custody since 22.09.2019 .There is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal in near future. With the aforesaid, prayer is made for suspension of the remaining custodial period of the appellant and grant of the bail to the appellant.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/state opposes the prayer for suspension of remaining jail sentence and submits that offences alleged against the appellant are serious in nature as complainant has suffered head injury. Hence, no case for grant of the bail to the appellant is made out .

Having considered the rival submissions, MLC report (Ex. P-6), statement of Dr. Brijraj Shukla(PW-8) with regard to the nature of injuries

sustained by the complainant and also looking to the period of custody already suffered by the appellant, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of the sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter I.A.No.5170/2022 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand only) along with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 13.09.2022 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

List in due course.

C.c. as per rules.

Signature Not Verified SAN

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN Date: 2022.06.28 18:31:38 IST JUDGE

sh

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN Date: 2022.06.28 18:31:38 IST