Raghu @ Ragha And Anr. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4083 MP

                                      1
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                              CRA No. 1038 of 2012
          (RAGHU @ RAGHA AND ANR. AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 24-03-2022
      Ms. Sharmila Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant no.2.
      Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent State.

Heard on I.A. No.3421/2022 which is repeat third application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence filed on behalf of appellant no.2 Mansharam @ Mansha S/o Ratan Singh.

Earlier first application (I.A.No.2858/2013) for suspension of jail sentence of

appellants was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 19.06.2013 and second application (I.A.No.5633/2013) for temporary suspension of jail sentence of appellant no.2 was considered on account of marriage of his daughter Lachhwati and allowed vide order dated 12.08.2013.

T he appellant no2 has been convicted under Sections 147, 323/149 and 302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one year R.I., six months and life imprisonment respectively with fine of Rs.100/- with default stipulations vide judgment dated 27.07.2012 delivered in Sessions Trial No.42/2011 by Special Judge, District Barwani.

Counsel for the appellants submits that application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant no.1 Raghu @ Ragha was allowed vide order dated 28.02.2022. Appellant no.2 is having parity with appellant no.1. Appellant no.2 is said to have caused injury to the deceased by means of wooden log, but injury no.20 on occipital region of the deceased is said to have been caused by sharp edged weapon and the injury was fatal in nature. The appellant no.2 is in jail since more than 11 years. There is long pendency of criminal appeals listed for final hearing and there is no possibility of final hearing of the present appeal in near future. Under these circumstance, learned counsel prays for suspension of jail sentence of the appellant no.2.

Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State opposes the prayer for suspension of jail sentence of the appellant no.2.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that

the application for suspension of custodial sentence moved on behalf of the appellant no.2 deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A. No.3421/2022 is allowed and it is directed that subject to depositing fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by the appellant no.2

Mansharam @ Mansha S/o Ratan Singh in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before the Court, the execution of custodial part of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

The appellant no.2 Mansharam @ Mansha S/o Ratan Singh after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his presence before concerned trial court on 26/09/2022 and on all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by Trial Court concerned.

I.A.No.3422/2022 an application for early hearing stands disposed of. Certified copy, as per rules.

      (VIVEK RUSIA)                                (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
          JUDGE                                             JUDGE

das
            Digitally signed by
            REENA PARTHO
            SARKAR
            Date: 2022.03.24
            17:19:38 +05'30'