Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dharmendra @ Amrat Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 May, 2022
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 4128 of 2019
(DHARMENDRA @ AMRAT SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 06-05-2022
Per Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J.
Shri Susheel Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Purushottam Tanwar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State.
Heard o n I.A.No.23263/2020, third application preferred under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of
appellant Dharmendra @ Amrit Singh. Earlier applications were dismissed as
withdrawn vide order dated 18/11/2019 and 25/02/2020.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to
suffer life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 397 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. of ten years with fine of Rs.4,000/- and Section 11/13 of
the MPDVPK Act and sentenced to undergo three years R.I. with default
stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12/03/2019
passed in Case No. 23/2009 (Dacoity). by Special Judge (Dacoity) Bhind, Distt.
Bhind (M.P.).
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has falsely
been implicated. The conviction and sentence awarded is wholly unwarranted. It is
submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody since
last three & half years. The date of incident is 19/01/2009 and judgment was
passed on 12/03/2019. Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 r/w 34,
397 of IPC and Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act. It is further submitted by learned
counsel that the judgment passed is perverse as there is no connecting evidence
against the present appellant, as appellant has been implicated in this case only on
the basis of seizure of motorcycle. Neither motorcycle is having any registration
number nor any engine or chesis number. Similarly, prosecution has stated that one
mobile phone sim was seized but no call details have been produced or proved
during trial. As there is no incriminating evidence or connecting evidence against
the appellant and there is no likelihood of the appeal coming up for hearing in the
near future. Hence, learned counsel prays for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail to the appellant.
Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/state has supported the
impugned judgment and has submitted that the appellant has been convicted by the
trial Court for offence under Sections 302 r/w 34, 397 of IPC and Section 11/13 of
MPDVPK Act and prosecution witness who was investigating officer in this case
has well proved the prosecution case and has submitted that motorcycle was
recovered as per the memorandum given by present appellant. Therefore, the
judgment passed is in accordance with law and there is no perversity. Hence,
prayed for dismissal of the application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is apparent from the perusal of record that the recovered motorcycle was
not having any engine, chesis and registration number and prosecution has not
proved call details of seized mobile sim which could establish that there was some
proximity to implicate the appellant.
Considering the aforesaid fact of the case coupled with the fact that the
appeal is not likely to come up for hearing in near future, IA.23263/2020 is hereby
allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended
and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with one solvent surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the CJM concerned for his appearance before the
Principal Registrar of this Court on 30.06.2022 and on all other subsequent dates
as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Prachi
PRACHI
MISHRA
2022.05.06
17:26:23
+05'30'
