Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohanlal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 October, 2022
Author: Vivek Rusia
- : 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)
ON THE 11th of October, 2022
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.68/2014
(MOHANLAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Ms. Sharmila Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant -
MOHANLAL.
Shri K.K.Tiwari, learned Govt.Advocate for the respondent/State.
The sole appellant- MOHANLAL has been convicted and
sentenced vide judgment dated 11/12/2013 in Session Trial
No.135/2011 passed by Sessions Judge, Neemuch District Neemuch as
below:-
Conviction Sentence
Section Act Imprisonment Fine deposited details Imprisonment in
lieu of Fine
302 IPC Life imprisonment Rs.10,000/- One year
Heard on I.A.No.8696/2022 which is first application for
suspension of sentence filed under section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. on
behalf of sole appellant- Mohanlal.
Along with the present appellant three other co-accused were put
to trial for committing the murder of Bagdiram Patidar (deceased)on
27.05.2011. Dehati Nalshi (Ex-P/4) was registered but all these accused
persons were arrested after three months. Star witness Ramu Bai (PW-
- : 2 :-
16) remained silent for one and half months and thereafter she
disclosed that she heard a voice of assault in the house of Mohanlal and
later on dead body of deceased (Bagdiram) was found.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits
that appellant was the owner of the house where the dead body was
found. Except this, there is no incriminating material collected to
connect the appellant with the present crime. So called witnesses have
turned hostile. The presence of Ramu bai (PW-16) has been disbelieved
by the Court. It is further submitted that the appellant has completed
more than ten years of actual jail sentence and is not a habitual offender.
As this appeal is of the year 2014 and it is not likely to come for final
hearing in near future; hence, in these circumstances, learned counsel
prays for suspension of jail sentence of appellant.
Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State opposes the
prayer for suspension of jail sentence of appellant.
Looking to the period of custody and that the appeal is of 2014
and there is no likelihood of final hearing of this criminal appeal in near
future, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application
for suspension of sentence I.A. No.8696/2022 is allowed. Execution of
jail sentence of the appellant- Mohanlal is hereby suspended and it is
ordered that the appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court for his appearance before the Court, the execution of
custodial part of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final
disposal of this appeal.
The appellant- Mohanlal shall mark his presence before the
- : 3 :-
Registry of this Court on 05/12/2022 and on all such subsequent and on
all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by the Registry.
I.A.No.8696/2022 stand disposed of.
(VIVEK RUSIA ) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
das
Digitally signed
by REENA
PARTHO SARKAR
Date: 2022.10.12
14:04:34 +05'30'
