Mohammad Sajid @ Sheru vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13565 MP

                                                                       1
                                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                               CRA No. 5541 of 2018
                                                 (MOHAMMAD SAJID @ SHERU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   Dated : 14-10-2022
                                         Mr. Vasant Ronald Daniel, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                         Ms. Ekta Gupta, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.1325 of 2021, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the appellant Mohammad Sajid @ Sheru.

The appellant has been convicted by the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court for offence punishable under Section 395 read with Section 397

of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for life with of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant raised several contentions. Mainly it is contended that there are various inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. Counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention to various omissions and contradictions in the testimonies. Counsel for the appellant has also pointed out certain part of the judgment to show that there are material contradictions. It is contended that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record and hence, arrived at an erroneous findings.

It is also submitted that the appellant is in custody for a long time i.e. about 11 years and final disposal of this appeal would take considerable time, it is prayed that the sentence of the appellant may be suspended and the appellant may be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer has vehemently opposed the Signature Not Verified SAN prayer for suspension.

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.10.18 17:13:39 IST I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The

appellant has been convicted for offences punishable under Section 395 read with Section 397 of the IPC. The appellant and other accused persons were armed with weapons. There are sufficient evidence against the appellant for establishing the aforesaid crime. Looking to the nature of offence, only on the basis of custody period, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence imposed on the appellant.

Accordingly, I.A. No.1325 of 2021 is hereby dismissed. Earlier the appellant had filed I.A. No.20236 of 2019, an application for grant of temporary bail on the ground of marriage of sister of the appellant. In verification, the factum of marriage of the sister of the appellant has been found

false and thereafter the Bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Smt. Anjuli Palo has passed various orders in that regard. Hence, Office is directed to list the matter before the aforesaid Bench on 11.11.2022 for appropriate orders.

                                        (SMT. ANJULI PALO)                          (DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
                                              JUDGE                                          JUDGE

                                   ks




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2022.10.18 17:13:39 IST