Sayyad Meer Jakir Ali vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13822 MP

                                                                  1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                          CRA No. 3316 of 2022
                                             (SAYYAD MEER JAKIR ALI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 27-10-2022
                                  Shri Gulab Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                  Shri Rajesh Joshi, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent/State.

Shri Aniket Naik, learned counsel for the objector. Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A.No.7942/2022, which is an application filed under Section

389(1) of Cr.P.C, for suspension of jail sentence moved on behalf of appellant - Sayyad Meer Jakir Ali.

Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 467, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo 03 years RI with fine of Rs.5000/-, 07 years RI with fine of Rs.10000/-, 03 years RI with fine of Rs.5000/-, 07 years RI with fine of Rs.10000/- and 03 years RI with fine of Rs.5000/- with stipulation vide judgement dated 30.03.2022 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas District Dewas in S.T. No.190/2016.

Prosecution story in brief is that appellant knowing the fact that he was not the owner of vehicles bearing registration Nos.DL-1-PB-092, DL-1-M-5609, DL-1-,-

5893 AND DL-1-M-5749 which were registered in the name of Gyanchandra, Narendra Singh, Rajesh and Suresh Soni, impersonating himself a owner of aforesaid vehicles and prepared forged and fabricated no objection certificates and got them registered as MP41/GA1695, MP41/GA1760, MP41/GA1761 and MP41/P0779 in his name at Regional Transport Office, Dewas and thereafter sold the same.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been convicted in the matter only on the basis of hand writing expert report (Ex.P-77 and P-35). It is apparent from the aforesaid report that no specific opinion has been given therein that forged signatures were similar to that of appellant's standard signature. Prosecution has Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 10/28/2022 10:25:56 AM

failed to prove the fact that no objection certificates (Ex.P-43 to P-46) were signed and prepared by the appellant and presented in the Regional Transport Office, Dewas. Seizure of the aforesaid documents from the regional transport office have also not been found proved. The vehicles said to be sold on the basis of forged documents have not been seized. Burden of proof has illegally been shifted on the appellant, therefore, impugned judgment convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B,m 467, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC is not sustainable. Appellant has been enlarged on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty granted to him. He has suffered jail incarceration for one year. There is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal in near future. With the aforesaid, prayer is made for suspension of the remaining custodial period and grant of bail to the appellant.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State as well as counsel for objector oppose the prayer and submits that this fact is not disputed that no objection certificates (Ex.P-43 to P-46) were forged. From the hand writing expert report, it has been found prove that the forged signatures (Q-1 to Q-4) were similar as that of appellants standard signature. Learned trial Court has rightly discussed the evidence produced on record. Offence alleged against the appellant are of serious in nature, therefore, no case is made out for grant of bail to the appellant.

Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. Prosecution case is based on documentary evidence wherein appellant has been convicted on the basis of hand writing expert report (Ex.P-77 and P-35). Admittedly, the vehicles which were said to be registered on the basis of forged documents (Ex.P- 43 to P-46), have not been seized in the matter. Considering the material specially, no objection certificates (Ex.P-43 to P-46), opinion of the hand writing expert with regard to the questioned signature and also considering the fact that appellant was enlarged on bail during trial as well as conclusion of appeal will take considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of the sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 10/28/2022 10:25:56 AM

I.A.No.7942/2022 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended.

It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) alongwith a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 05.12.2022 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

List for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy, as per Rules.

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE

Vibha

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 10/28/2022 10:25:56 AM