Gourav Mali vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2998 MP

                                                                         1
                                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                       CRA No. 1377 of 2022
                                                         (GOURAV MALI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 03-03-2022
                                          Shri Anurag Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant.
                                          Shri D.K. Shrivastava, learned Government Advocate for the
                                   respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal seems to be arguable, hence it is admitted for final hearing. Also heard on I.A.No.2336/2022, which is an application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of the custodial sentence passed against appellant Gourav Mali.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 25/1/2022 passed by Third Additional Session Judge, Mandla (M.P.) in Session Trial No.106/2011 whereby learned Session Judge found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 r/w section 34 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for 5 years with fine o f Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for 5 years with fine o f Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for 2 years with fine o f Rs.1,000/- and R.I. for 5 years with fine o f Rs.1,000/- respectively with default clause.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the allegation against the appellant is that appellant Gourav Mali in connivance with other co-accused persons prepared forged toll tax receipt and took Rs.60/- as toll tax from Ashok Raghuvanshi (PW-4) instead of Rs.18/- but Ashok Raghuvanshi (PW-4) did not support the prosecution story and turned hostile. From the statements of other prosecution witnesses also it is not proved that appellant prepared any forged receipt or took excess amount from Ashok Raghuvanshi (PW-4). Learned trial Court without appreciating the evidence of these witnesses properly, wrongly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offences. The appellant is in jail since the date of judgement i.e. 25/1/2022. Hence, prayed for suspension of the jail sentence and release of the appellant on bail since the hearing of this appeal will take time.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submitted that learned trial Court did not commit any mistake in finding the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence. So, the appellant should not be released on bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, contention of learned counsel for the appellant and the fact that the appellant is in custody since 25/1/2022 and according to listing policy the hearing of this appeal is likely to take a long time, the application is allowed and it is directed that the execution of the jail Signature Not Verified sentence alone passed against the appellant shall remain suspended during the SAN

pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.03.03 17:27:04 IST in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 09/05/2022 and on such further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.

List the matter for final hearing in due course.

C.C. on payment of usual charges.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

VS

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2022.03.03 17:27:04 IST