Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajkumar Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 April, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 7462 of 2021
(RAJKUMAR KOL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 17-04-2023
Shri Harsharan Verma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Nitin Gupta - Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No. 7729/2023, an application for suspension of
sentence, which is third application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for
suspension of sentence filed on behalf of appellant-Rajkumar Kol S/o Shri
Mohanlal Kol.
Appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 379, 420,
467, 468 and 471 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year, R.I. for three years, R.I. for seven years, R.I. for
five years and R.I. for seven years with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is in custody
since 25/11/2021. He has faced incarceration of about six months during the
trial also. It is submitted that on surmises and conjectures, the present appellant
has been convicted.
Reading paragraph 45 of the impugned judgment, it is pointed out that
prosecution had examined one Rituraj Gupta, Additional State Examiner of
Questioned Documents, Government of M.P. Bhopal who had opined that the
said cheque does not contain signatures of Shashibala Jha, District Education
Signature Not Verified
SAN Officer and a sum of Rs. 75,500/- was withdrawn by forging her signatures.
Digitally signed by VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR
Date: 2023.04.18 10:28:56 IST
It is also mentioned that signatures on the said Questioned Document i.e.
the cheque could not be connected with the handwriting and signatures of
accused Rajkumar Kol but the trial court convicted the present appellant merely
on the ground that since cheque does not contain signatures of Shashibala Jha,
therefore, there must be signatures of the present appellant. It is submitted that
there are good chances of success in the appeal.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Deputy Government Advocate opposes the
prayer.
However, taking this fact into consideration that the appellant has
suffered more than 21 months incarceration and the appeal is going to take time
for its conclusion and there are good chances of success in the appeal, without
commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that
it is a fit case where execution of remaining part of jail sentence shall remain
stayed.
Accordingly, I.A. No.7729/2023 is allowed.
I t is directed that on depositing of fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court i.e.
VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Katni on 25 t h July, 2023 and, thereafter,
Additional Sessions Judge shall fix the dates which shall not be more than twice
a year for appearance of the appellant, the appellant be released on bail and his
substantive sentence under appeal shall remain suspended.
Certified copy as per rules.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
Digitally signed by VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR
Date: 2023.04.18 10:28:56 IST JUDGE
vy
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR
Date: 2023.04.18 10:28:56 IST
