Pallu @ Jitendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3328 MP

                                        1
             The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                       CRA No. 229 of 2015
             (PALLU @ JITENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Gwalior, Dated : 09-03-2022
         Shri N.P.Dwivedi, learned Senior counsel with Shri S.K.Tiwari, counsel for

the appellant.
         Shri Rajesh Shukla,        learned   Deputy Advocate         General for   the
respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.2170/2020, an application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence on behalf of the appellant No.1 Pallu alias Jitendra

Singh.

It is the submission of learned Senior counsel that only source of implication in the present case is dying declaration and all other witnesses did not support the story of prosecution and declared hostile. The trial Court erred in convicting the appellant and awarding jail sentence only on solitary basis of dying declaration. The same was not in proper form and it was not read over to the victim and the fact regarding exact status of consciousness have not been demonstrated in dying declaration. Therefore, very existence of dying declaration stands vitiated. The appellant No.1 suffered about 7-8 years of incarceration. Learned Senior counsel

relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of Shaikh Bakshu and others vs. State of Maharashtra, 2007 (1) SCC 269, Garibdas alias Pappu Choudahri vs. State of M.P., ILR 2014 MP 1923, Sampat Babso Kale and another vs. State of Maharashtra, 2019 (4) SCC 739 and Paparambaka Rosamma vs. State of Andra Pradesh, 1999 (7) SCC 695 to demonstrate dichotomy between "fit state of mind" and "consciousness".

Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submits that earlier application for suspension of sentence has been rejected on merits vide order dated 21.02.2017. Therefore, advancement of arguments amounts to review. He prayed for dismissal of application.

Considering the submissions, it appears that earlier Coordinate Bench has already taken a view vide order dated 21.02.2017 and directed the appellant to raise all the grounds at the time of final hearing, therefore, it is not apposite to take

another view at this juncture.

Considering the submissions, the application (I.A.No.2170/2020) stands rejected. However, at this juncture, at the request of learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant, matter be placed in the week commencing

04.04.2022 for final hearing before the Division Bench.

  (ANAND PATHAK)                                   (SATISH KUMAR SHARMA)
      JUDGE                                                 JUDGE

AK/-
       ANAND KUMAR
       2022.03.09
       18:41:08 +05'30'