Mukesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4178 MP

                                         1

           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh

                       CRA No. 1659 of 2020

            (MUKESH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Gwalior, Dated: 25.03.2022
       Shri S.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants.

       Shri Naval Kishor Gupta, learned Govt. Advocate, for the

respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.33674/21.

This is the first application for suspension of sentence under

Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant- No.2 Sanju @

Sanjay.

Appellant- Sanju @ Sanjay has been convicted under section

302/34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with fine of

Rs.1,000/- and convicted under Section 201 of IPC and sentenced to

suffer three years' R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default clause

vide judgment dated 19.12.2019 passed by Sessions Judge, Datia,

(M.P.) in S.T.No.200115/2016,

Appellant is in custody for 13 days before the date of judgment

and is in custody since the date of judgment i.e. 19.12.2019 uptill

now.

As per prosecution story, a human skeleton which was later

identified to be of deceased Santosyh was recovered which led to

registration of inquest. During enquiry, statements of Jaipal Yadav

(P.W.3) and Vivek Yadav (P.W.15) were recorded. Pertinently the

prosecution case appears to be based on circumstantial evidence

including the statements of Jaipal Yadav (P.W.3) and Vivek Yadav

(P.W.15) who were last seen witnesses, who saw the deceased about a

month before the incident along with Ram Singh, Arvind, Swami

Barar and Ram Singh Kushwah. The appellant has been implicated

based on the discovery statement of co-convicted person Arvind

Rawat. Pertinently, no incriminating material was discovered pursuant

to the discovery statement of appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant prays for suspension of

sentence primarily on the ground of parity with co-accused Ramsingh

and Mukesh in whose case the co-ordinate Bench has suspended the

sentence vide order dt.09.09.2021 in Cr.A.No.1460/2020 and in

Cr.A.No.1659/2020 and also claims parity with co-accused Swami

vide order dated 22.11.2021 in Cr.A.No.6368/2020 inter alia

contending that the accusation against the appellant is same as against

co-accused Ramsingh, Mukesh and Swami. Further, conviction is

based on circumstantial evidence. The chain of circumstances is not

complete. The trial Court committed grave illegality in convicting the

appellant and sentencing for life imprisonment.

On the other hand, Shri Naval Kishore Gupta, Advocate

appearing for respondent/State, opposes the prayer.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties without

commenting upon the rival contentions touching the merits of the case

and the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present appellant is

held entitled for suspension of sentence and thus the application

deserves to be allowed.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,

without commenting anything on merits of the case, I.A.No.33674/21

is allowed. Subject to verification of fine amount amount deposited

by the appellant and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent

surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial

Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant shall remain

suspended and he shall be released on bail.

The appellant shall firstly appear before the Registry of this

Court on 27.06.2022 and thereafter on all other subsequent date

as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till disposal of this

appeal.

                             C.C.as per rules




                   (ROHIT ARYA)                   (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
                     JUDGE                                 JUDGE


                   mani

SUBASRI MANI
2022.03.26
12:38:08 -07'00'