Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramaveer Pal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 March, 2022
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
01
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA 2563/2019
(Ramveer Pal Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated: 16.03.2022
Shri Raju Singh Sikarwar, learned counsel for appellant.
Shri K.S. Tomar, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:
IA. No.340/2022, 1st application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant
No.1 - Ramveer Pal is taken up and considered.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 23 rd January, 2019
passed in S.T. No.100114/2011 by Additional Sessions Judge Seonda
Distt. Datia whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as
under :-
Section Sentence Fine (Rs.)
364/120 B of Life Rs. 5,000/- with default
IPC Imprisonment stipulation
201 of IPC 5 Years RI Rs. 1,000/- with default
stipulation
As per the prosecution story on 04.08.2010 complainant Harvilas
Kushwah had given intimation to Police Station Atreta, District Datia
that on 03.08.2010 at about 07.00 pm he had left his field for his house
but when he returned back to his field on 04.08.2010 at about 07.00 am,
he saw some blood adjacent to the well and when peeped in the well saw
dead body of a person not known to him. Age of the deceased was
between 35-40 years. On such intimation, Marg No.4/2010 (Ex.P/1) was
registered. On investigation it was revealed that dead body was of
Lakhan Singh S/o Narayan Singh Jatav and on being so identified dead
body was handed over to Vijay Singh S/o Narayan Singh Jatav on
08.08.2010.
It is further submitted that present case is of circumstantial
evidence and only on the basis of last seen evidence of Vijay Singh
(PW-6), Narayani Bai (PW-7) and Rambabu (PW-8) appellant has been
implicated in the case. Out of the aforesaid witnesses, Narayani Bai
(PW-7) and Rambabu (PW-8) have not supported the prosecution case
and have been declared hostile. Even otherwise, they admitted in their
statements that their source of information is Vijay Singh. Vijay Singh
(PW-6) has though stated that he has last seen the deceased in the
company of appellant along with other accused, but he has stated that he
was informed about the aforesaid facts by Ramesh Jatav, who was not
examined by the prosecution. However, he was examined by the defence
as DW-2 and he has specifically stated that on 2.8.2010 he did not see
Lakhan and Narayani Bai accompanying accused Mevaram, Ramvir
(apellant) and Kallu. Neither he saw aforesaid persons nor 7-8 others
sitting in bolero vehicle. He even did not see any bolero vehicle on the
spot. He further stated that he did not tell aforesaid facts to Vijay Singh
(PW-6) and Vijay Singh had told him that he will give Rs.20,000-
25,000/- to him if he will tell police personnel that he saw Lakhan and
Narayani Bai going along with accused Mevaram, Ramvir (appellant)
and Kallu. It is further submitted that this Court vide order dated
8.12.2021 has granted suspension of sentence to co-accused Kallu
Bhadoriya in connected Criminal Appeal No.2057/2019. Moreso
appellant No.2-Mevaram @ Mevalal Baghel has been extended benefit
of suspension of sentence by this Court by order dated 17.12.2021
passed in present criminal appeal.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the application and prayed
for its rejection
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, IA. No.340/2022 is
allowed and it is directed that jail sentence of appellant will remain
under suspension subject to verification that the amount of fine has been
deposited, on appellant's furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to
the satisfaction of concerned Trial Court/CJM/Remand Magistrate
(Whosoever is available) for his appearance before the Principal
Registrar of this Court on 13th of June, 2022 and thereafter on such
further dates as may be fixed by the office of this Court in this regard till
disposal of the appeal.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
necessary compliance.
Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.
(Rohit Arya) (Deepak Kumar Agarwal)
Judge Judge
ojha
YOGENDRA
OJHA
2022.02.23
15:55:13 +05'30'
