Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 May, 2022
Author: Rohit Arya
01
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA 1800/2020
(Manoj & Anr. Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated: 02.05.2022
Shri Harish Sharma, learned counsel for appellants.
Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General for
respondent/State.
Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:
IA. No.6078/2010, 2nd application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of
appellant No.1-Manoj Yadav is taken up and considered.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 20.12.2019
passed in S.T.No.160/2014 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Datia
(MP) whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under with
default stipulation :-
Sections (IPC) Imprisonment Fine
148 of IPC Two years R.I. Rs.1000/- with default
stipulation for two
months
460 of IPC Five years R.I. Rs.2000/- with default
stipulation for six
months
302/149 of IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.5000/- with default
stipulation for two
years
25(1-B)A of Arms Act Two years R.I. Rs.1000/- with default
stipulation for two
months
27 of Arms Act Three years R.I. Rs.1000/- with default
stipulation for three
months
Brief facts of the case are that one Mukesh Yadav lodged a report
at Police Station Dinara District Datia that on 11.05.2014 he were
sleeping. In the morning at 4:35 am, he listened sound of bullet. He
awoke and saw that in the courtyard seven persons were standing. They
are having gun. There names were Anil, Manoj Yadav, Kalla Yadav, Man
Singh, Satish and Deepak. Afterwards by entering in the boundary
accused Anil, Narendra and Satish with 12 bore gun and country made
pistol fired on his brother Kallu @ Jitendra due to which he died. On his
report crime No.171/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 302,
147, 148, 452 of IPC was registered against accused. Dead body
panchanama was prepared. Three entry and exist wounds were found on
the body of deceased. Afterwards appellant alongwith other co-accused
was convicted.
From the side of appellant it is submitted that no overt act has
been attributed against present appellant. Eye witness Mukesh and his
mother Meena Yadav in their statements revealed that the main
assailants are Anil, Narendra and Satish and due to their fire, deceased
Kallu @ Jitendra died. Sentence of co-accused Deepak has been
suspended by this Court vide order dated 08.04.2022 and the case of the
present appellant is on same footing. Appellant was on bail during trial
and he did not misuse the liberty extended to him. The appeal is of year
2020 and final outcome will take time. Under these circumstances, he
prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the application and prayed
for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the
material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without
commenting anything on the merits of the case, IA.No.6078/2022 is
allowed and it is directed that jail sentence of appellant No.1-Manoj
Yadav 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 for his
appearance before the Principal Registrar of this Court on 27th 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.
C.c. as per rules.
(Rohit Arya) (Deepak Kumar Agarwal)
Judge Judge
vv
VALSALA
VASUDEVAN
2022.05.02
19:24:32
+05'30'
