Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ghanshyam Panwar Mogiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 October, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 8902 of 2022
(GHANSHYAM PANWAR MOGIYA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-10-2022
Shri Kaushal Sisodiya, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Ajay R. Gupta, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.13237/2022, an application for suspension of jail
sentence of the appellants - Ghanshyam Pawar and Dinesh Pawar.
Appellant no.1 Ghanshyam has been convicted by 1st Additional
Sessions Judge, Distt. Dhar vide judgment dated 09.09.2022 passed in S.T.
No. 02/2021 for commission of offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo 03 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/-. In default of
payment of fine 01 months additional RI.
Appellant no.2 - Dinesh has been convicted by 1st Additional Sessions
Judge, Distt. Dhar vide judgment dated 09.09.2022 passed in S.T. No. 02/2021
for commission of offence punishable under Section 326/34 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo 03 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/-. In default of payment
of fine 01 months additional RI.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as per prosecution case
itself, all the injuries found on the body of the complainant as well as other
injured persons were caused by hard and blunt object, even then appellants
have been convicted for the offences as mentioned above. Appellants and
injured persons have resolved their dispute amicably out of Court and filed
compromise application before the trial Court which was also rejected. He
further submits that short sentence has been awarded to the appellants by the
learned trial Court and their sentence has already been suspended by the Court
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 10/12/2022
12:10:32 PM
below till today i.e. 11.10.2022. Appellants were on bail during trial. He submits
that the learned trial court erred in holding the appellants guilty in the alleged
offence. There are omissions and contradictions in the finding of the learned
trial court. The final conclusion of the appeal shall take considerable time.
Hence, prays that application for suspension of sentence be allowed.
Learned counsel for respondent/State has opposed the prayer and prays
for rejection of the application for suspension of sentence.
On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case so also
looking to the short sentence awarded by the learned trial Court to the
appellants, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case,
I.A.No.13237/2022 is allowed.
It is directed that upon appellants depositing the fine amount (if not
already deposited) and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of
Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety in
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial court, the substantive jail
sentence of appellants shall remain suspended till the final disposal of the
appeal and they shall be released on bail for their appearance before the
Registry of this court on 09.11.2022 and all other subsequent dates, as may be
fixed in this behalf by the Office.
Record of Court below be requisitioned.
List for admission after receipt of record.
C.c. as per rules.
(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 10/12/2022
12:10:32 PM
