Ramesh Dhurve vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13925 MP

                                                                         1
                                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                                    CRA No. 8272 of 2022
                                                        (RAMESH DHURVE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                   Dated : 28-10-2022
                                          Mr. Abhijeet Awasthi, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                          Mr. Raghuveer Prajapati, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on admission.

The appeal being arguable, hence admitted for hearing. Also heard on I.A. No.20103 of 2022, which is an application filed by the appellant under Section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence and

grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted by the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court for offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 120B/511, Section 467 read with Section 120-B, Section 468 read with Section 120-B and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years (fine Rs.500/-), RI for 5 years (fine Rs.500/-) and RI for 4 years (fine Rs.500/-), respectively.

As per the prosecution case, allegation against the appellant and other accused persons is that they prepared a forged and fabricated death certificate of the complainant - Fatehsingh s/o Tuklal and also manipulated the Birth-Death Register and produced the aforesaid documents before the Office of SDM, Betul with the intention

to illegally receive amount of compensation in lieu of land of the complainant acquired by the government.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not appreciated the evidence on record in proper perspective and hence arrived at erroneous findings. There are material contradiction and omission in the testimonies of the witnesses. The appellant has neither authority nor he has issued any document in question which are alleged to be forged. Though call details of the phone calls by the Signature Not Verified SAN

appellant has been produced by Ravishankar Inkre (PW-18) for establishing the factum Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.10.28 17:41:25 IST of conspiracy but no certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act was

produced. Trial Court has not considered that so many prosecution witnesses, PW-3, PW-7, PW-6, PW-11 and PW-14 have turned hostile. It is further submitted that ingredients of Section 468 were missing in the entire prosecution case however, the trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant. The final disposal of this appeal would take considerable time, therefore, the jail sentence of the appellants may be suspended and they may be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In paragraph

33, the trial Court has recorded a finding that at the relevant time, the appellant was

working as Panchayat Secretary and was having authority to issue death

certificate and the document in question was seized from his house. Looking to the other findings recorded by the trial Court as well, and evidence available on record, at this juncture, it is not a fit case where sentence imposed on the appellant should be suspended.

Accordingly, I.A. No.20103 of 2022 is hereby dismissed. List the case for final hearing in due course.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE

ks

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2022.10.28 17:41:25 IST