Raju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13500 MP

                                   1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT INDORE
                            CRA No. 2735 of 2021
                 (RAJU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 13-10-2022
      Ms.Sharmila Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants.

      Shri K.K. Tiwari, learned Govt. advocate for the respondent/ State.

Heard on I.A. No.1435/2022, a first application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant no.2- [email protected] Kamal Singh s/o Fransis.

Appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 01.03.2021 passed by Sessions Judge, Jhabua in Sessions Trial No.138/2019 whereby the

trial court has convicted the appellant under Section 302/34 of the IPC and sentence to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 200/-; in default of payment of fine, further RI for 1 year.

As per prosecution story on 01.09.2019 Narayan, Kaliya (PW/2), Shyamlal and Kamlesh S/o Somla were returning to village in a tempo bearing registration no. MP-45-G-1878 and on the way the appellants came on a motorcycle and started assaulting Narayan. He sustained 11 incised wounds due to which he died. An FIR was lodged on 02.09.2019 at 9:22 a.m. During investigation police arrested appellants Raju and Kamlesh and on their

disclosure statements the weapons which were used in the incident were seized and sent for FSL examination, but no report was received. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed. In trial both the accused Raju and Kamlesh were convicted and sentenced as is stated hereinabove.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that neither in the FIR nor in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the name of Kamlesh s/o Fransis was disclosed. Kamlesh was having a contract of fishing and there was a dispute

with Narayan and his family members, therefore, he has falsely been implicated. Learned counsel has referred the statements of Savitabai (PW/1) and Kaliya (PW/2) who have admitted in their cross-examination that they did not identify the accused persons at the time of commission of the offence. In such circumstances, counsel for the appellant prays for suspension of sentence and release of him on bail.

Learned Govt. advocate opposes the application and prays for its rejection.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and going through the evidence available on record,

the application is allowed. It is directed that the jail sentence passed against the appellant Kamlesh s/o Fransis @ Farsingh shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 20.03.2023 and on such further dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.

C.C. as per rules.

      (VIVEK RUSIA)                                (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
          JUDGE                                             JUDGE
                      Digitally signed by HARI KUMAR C
hk/
                      G NAIR
                      Date: 2022.10.13 18:14:56 +05'30'