Madhya Pradesh High Court
Navin @ Shankar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 March, 2022
Author: Rajendra Kumar (Verma)
Cr.A. No.9503/2018 1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA No. 9503/2018
(NAVIN @ SHANKAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
INDORE: 03.03.2022
Shri Sanjay Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Varsha Thakur, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Submissions were made on I.A. No.29592/2021, an
application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail
sentence moved on behalf of appellant No.1- Navin @
Shankar, who is husband of the deceased.
Appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections
498-A, 304-B of IPC, 1860 and sentenced to undergo 2 years
and 10 years R.I and a fine of Rs.500/- and Rs.2000/-,
respectively with usual default stipulations vide judgment
dated 30/11/2018 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions
Judge, District Ratlam in S.T. No.293/2012.
As per prosecution case, deceased Devyanti got married
to the appellant no.1 in the year 2008. The deceased was
allegedly subjected to physical and mental harassment and
therefore, she committed suicide by consuming sulphas on
08/09/2012.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there has
been exaggeration in the statement of prosecution witnesses.
Counsel has pointed out the attention towards the statement of
father of the deceased Munnalal (P.W.1) and submitted that
the deceased was reared up by her grand parents and there is
no good relationship of the deceased in her maternal house,
SUMATHI Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL,
postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
JAGADEE
2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a5432c9ce6df
4c49ae556251c6a1b1fca11a86643b2a2,
pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748B6F8C1E18
D805F7FACD91F2,
serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4DF2469FAAF
SAN
F13E836178C3C81533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD3
37B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN
Date: 2022.03.04 15:23:49 +05'30'
even on her first Raksha Bandan festival no one has gone to
her matrimonial house and appellant himself has taken the
deceased to her maternal house. Further counsel has drawn
attention of this Court to para-12 of Munnalal (P.W.1)'s
statement and submitted that Munnalal has clearly stated that
the deceased told him that she is very comfortable in her
matrimonial house and will reside with her in-laws. Also in
para-13, Munnalal (P.W.1) has stated that their house is under
construction (kacha makan) whereas the appellant's house is
fully constructed house with three rooms and he had a
motorcycle as well. Therefore, it is clear that the in-laws of
the deceased were well settled and there was no requirement
for them to demand dowry from the deceased and to harass
her for not fulfilling their demand. It is also submitted that
after cremation the parents & the relatives of the deceased
returned to their home and after eight days, a complaint has
been made. The appellant has already suffered more than half
of the jail sentence awarded to him. Counsel has relied upon
the judgment of Salim Javed vs. State of Rajasthan reported
as (2006) 9 SCC 602, in support of his submissions. Under
these circumstances, counsel prays for suspension of
remaining jail sentence of appellant and grant of bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State on the
other hand, has opposed the bail application by submitting
that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the
appellant on bail, hence the application filed by the appellant
be dismissed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant and
SUMAT
HI
Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL,
postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a5432c9ce6df
4c49ae556251c6a1b1fca11a86643b2a2,
JAGAD
pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748B6F8C1E18
D805F7FACD91F2,
serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4DF2469FAAF
F13E836178C3C81533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD3
37B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN
Date: 2022.03.04 15:24:10 +05'30'
EESAN
the period of incarceration of the appellant, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the application for suspension of
custodial sentence moved on behalf of the appellant deserves
to be allowed .
Accordingly, I.A. No.29592/2021 is allowed and it is
directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and on
furnishing personal bond by appellant in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Court, for his regular appearance before this Court, the
execution of custodial part of the sentence imposed against
the appellant shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of
this appeal.
Appellant Navin @ Shankar after being enlarged on
bail, shall mark his presence before the Registry of this Court
on 26.07.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be
fixed by the Registry in this regard.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA))
JUDGE
sumathi
SUMA Digitally signed by SUMATHI
JAGADEESAN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
THI
MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE,
ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001,
st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a543
2c9ce6df4c49ae556251c6a1b1fca11
JAGAD
a86643b2a2,
pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748B
6F8C1E18D805F7FACD91F2,
serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4DF
2469FAAFF13E836178C3C81533BF4
D0F8641FFAB3DD337B,
EESAN
cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN
Date: 2022.03.04 15:30:18 +05'30'
