Munna Alias Radheshyam Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 12316 MP

                                         1
                                                           Criminal Appeal 2003/2017
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                AT JABALPUR
                      CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2003 OF 2017
             (MUNNA @ RADHESHYAM YADAV VS. STATE OF M.P.)
Dated : 15-09-2022
      Shri Ankit Saxena, Advocate for the appellant.
      Shri Arvind Singh, Government Advocate for the respondent State.

Heard the parties on I.A. No. 3376/2020, third application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the appellant. First application I.A. No. 5201/2018 was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 29.08.2018 and second application I.A. No. 3992/2019 was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 26.04.2019.

Appellant /accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation.

As per prosecution on 09.11.2014 at about 8:30 p.m. at Sabji Mandi Ashoka Garden, Bhopal, appellant Munna caught hold the deceased Javed and co-accused Sonu @ Ansar assaulted him by means of Baka. Deceased had got five cut injuries on his body. He was admitted in Hamidiya Hospital for treatment and he died on 02.01.2015.

Learned counsel for the appellant/ accused submits that appellant/accused has falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity. He further submits that learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in correct way. He further submits that all witnesses of the incident have not supported the case of prosecution except mother of the deceased Rehana Begum (PW/3). As per learned counsel for appellant, Rehana Begum (PW/3) being mother of the deceased is related witness, therefore, without corroboration, her statement is not reliable. Appellant was custody since 11.11.2014 to 16.01.2015 and after the judgment appellant is in custody. There

Criminal Appeal 2003/2017 are so many contradictions and omissions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. Trial Court erred grievously convicting and sentencing the appellant on the basis of the evidence of the eye witness PW/3. Final hearing of this appeal will take considerable time. There is fair chance to succeed in the appeal. Under these circumstances, prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the present accused/appellant.

Shri Arvind Singh, G.A. opposed the I.A. He supported the judgment of trial court.

We have heard the parties.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, evidence of eye witness, injuries sustained by the deceased as well as the fact that there was an ulterior motive and intention of the present appellant to kill the deceased and seriousness of the offence, hence, in our opinion, prima-facie no case is made out for suspension of sentence. Application (I.A. No. 3376/2020) is here dismissed.

List the appeal for final hearing in due course.

          (SUJOY PAUL)                          (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
             JUDGE                                     JUDGE


 MISHRA

ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA
2022.09.19 16:37:23 +05'30'