Madhya Pradesh High Court
Magan Singh Bhilala vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 May, 2022
Author: Sheel Nagu
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1346 of 2016
(MAGAN SINGH BHILALA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 06-05-2022
Shri Subodh Tamrakar, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Shukla, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
I.A.No.1750/2022, which is repeat (third) application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant-Magan
Singh Bhilala is taken up and considered along with reply of the State. Earlier
applications were dismissed as withdrawn.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 16.03.2016 passed in
S.T. No.30/2015 by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen, District-Raisen
(M.P.) whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and
sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1000/- with default
stipulation.
Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant herein had no role to
play as far as the offence in question was concerned. Yet in absence of
evidence, he has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that
there is a failure by the Court below to evaluate the testimony of Dr. Arvind
Chauhan (PW.12). He submits that there is no hope of concluding this appeal in
the near future. Therefore, in view of the above, he prays that appellant be
enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the said application and supports
the findings of the learned Court below in the impugned judgment and submits
that earlier applications were dismissed as withdrawn. He further submits that
looking to the role attributed to the present appellant in the incident, the trial
Court rightly convicted the present appellant and prayed that she is not entitled
to be enlarged on bail.
We have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid and the fact that Dr. Arvind Chauhan (PW-12) in
his testimony stated that the injuries which were found on the person of the
deceased were 2 to 6 days old and further stated in paragraph 4 of his testimony
that if proper treatment would have been provided to the deceased, there was
likelihood of his survival which indicates towards the possibility that the death is
ultimately found to be not attributable to the injuries inflicted by appellant. That
there is no hope of concluding this appeal in the near future and also the period
of custody of 8 years and 5 months , this Court without entering into the merits
of the matter is inclined to grant benefit of bail to the appellant by way of
suspension of sentence. Hence, IA. No.1750/2022 is allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that jail sentence of appellant-Magan Singh
Bhilala will remain under suspension on his furnishing bail bond of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties of
Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of Trial Court for his appearance before
CJM, Raisen on 20.06.2022 and on such further dates as may be fixed in this
regard which shall be of frequency not less than once a year.
In case, appellant is found absent on any date fixed by the concerned
CJM, then concerned CJM shall be free to issue and execute warrant of arrest
for securing his presence without first referring the matter to this Court,
provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.
Learned concerned CJM and the prosecution are directed to ensure
following of Covid-19 precautionary protocol prescribed from time to time by
the Supreme Court, the Central Govt. as well as the State Govt. during release,
travel and residence of the appellant during period of suspension of sentence
as a consequence of this order.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
C.c. as per rules.
(SHEEL NAGU) (MANINDER S BHATTI)
JUDGE JUDGE
sp
SAVITRI PATEL
2022.05.11 18:50:33
+05'30'
