Galu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7030 MP

                                                                          1
                                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                 AT INDORE
                                                                   CRA No. 4991 of 2021
                                                        (GALU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       Dated : 10-05-2022
                                             Shri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the appellant No.4 (Heerabai).

                                             Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.3779/2022, which is first application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence on behalf of appellant No.4 (Heerabai). The appellant has been convicted vide judgment dated 28.7.2021 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Petlawad, District Jhabua in

S.T.No.51/2012 for the offence punishable under Section 302/149, 148 of IPC and under Section 323/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, 1 year RI and 1 year RI respectively with fine of Rs.100/- on each count with default stipulation.

As per prosecution story, complainant Situ @ Chitu Bilwal lodged a report that on 29.11.2011 at about 8.30 PM that he along with his father Toliya (deceased), mother Lalibai, Monica and Sammu were sitting outside their house and having a conversation. The accused persons namely Galu, Pammu, Bhariya, Heerabai, Jhitribai and Manglibai came there armed with deadly

weapons Dhariya, Axe and Lathi with a common intention to kill and started abusing Toliya (deceased) and the other persons. They were complaining that Toliya (deceased) had illegally collected cotton from their agriculture lands. They assaulted Toliya by means of the arms in their hands and the other persons also sustained injuries while saving the deceased. Thereafter all the Signature Not Verified SAN accused persons ran away from the spot. FIR was registered under Sections Digitally signed by SHAILESH MAHADEV SUKHDEVE Date: 2022.05.12 14:30:41 IST 302, 307, 294, 323, 147, 148, 149 of IPC and under Section 25(1-B) of the

Arms Act and they were arrested. After undergoing the entire trial all the accused persons have been convicted under Sections 302, 302/149, 148 and 323/149 of IPC.

So far as the present appellant No.4 is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant submits that her name is not reflected in the FIR as well as in the 161 Cr.P.C statement of complainant Situ @ Chitu Bilwal. After three days he has improved his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and included the name of the present appellant therefore, present appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that family members of deceased and family members of the complainant were known to each other

and had they been present at the place of incident, their names would have been disclosed. It is further submitted that even otherwise Toliya died because of head injury caused by appellant No.1 Galu and other injuries are simple in nature. The present appellant has assaulted by means of stick and fatal injury incised wound is on head caused by sharp edged weapon. Other complainants sustained simple injuries for which appellant has been convicted under Section 323/149 of IPC therefore, the present appellant is entitled for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this appeal is likely to take considerable time for its final hearing, he therefore, prays that the custodial sentence of the appellant No.4 be suspended and she be released on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the application for suspension of jail sentence.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments Signature Not Verified SAN

advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion Digitally signed by SHAILESH MAHADEV SUKHDEVE

that the application for suspension of custodial sentence moved on behalf of the Date: 2022.05.12 14:30:41 IST

appellant No.4 (Heerabai) deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A.No.3779/2022 is allowed and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and on furnishing a personal bond by the appellant No.4 in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for her appearance before the Court, the execution of custodial part of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

Appellant No.4 after being enlarged on bail shall mark her presence before the concerned trial Court on 29.9.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, which shall be fixed in this regard by the trial Court concerned.

C.c. as per rules.

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

                                       SS/-




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by SHAILESH MAHADEV
SUKHDEVE
Date: 2022.05.12 14:30:41 IST