Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 April, 2023
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1235 of 2023
(BALRAM AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 28-04-2023
Shri Akash Rathi - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Bhuwan Gautam - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.3531/2023, which is first application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C., filed on
behalf of the Appellants.
The Trial Court has convicted the appellants vide judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 05.01.2023 passed by First Additional Sessions
Judge, Khategaon, District - Dewas (M.P.) in S.T. No.18/2021.
Conviction
Sentence Fine In default
Section/Act
302/34 of IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.5,000/- 3 months R.I.
323/34 of IPC 1 month S.I. Rs.500/- 8 days S.I.
323/34 of IPC 1 month S.I. Rs.500/- 8 days S.I.
323/34 of IPC 1 month S.I. Rs.500/- 8 days S.I.
As per prosecution case, the present appellants and co-appellants
assaulted the deceased Chhannulal and injured persons Dilip (PW-1), Phoolwati
Bai (PW-2) and Sunita Bai (PW-3) by means of wooden stick, pirana stone
and slippers (chappal). Due to injuries, the deceased Chhannulal had died and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 29-04-
2023 12:33:02
Dilip, Phoolwati Bai and Sunita Bai received injuries on their body.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as per prosecution case,
the present appellants are women and they have assaulted only Phoolwati Bai
(PW-2) and Sunita Bai @ Bhuri (PW-3). Injured eye witnesses Dilip (PW-1),
Phoolwati Bai (PW-2) and Sunita Bai @ Bhuri (PW-3) got only simple injuries.
Phoolwati Bai (PW-2) in Paragraph 14 of cross-examination has admitted that
firstly, co-appellant Rahul had come on the spot thereafter, two other accused
persons had come and thereafter, the present appellants had come there. Sunita
@ Bhuri (PW-3) in Paragraph 16 of cross-examination has admitted that when
deceased got injured, thereafter, the present appellants had come on the spot.
Apart from that, there are material contradictions and omissions in the statement
of eye witnesses. The present appellants had not assaulted the deceased. The
present appellants were in custody from 04.12.2020-21.01.2021 and they are
also in custody since date of the judgement i.e., 05.01.2023. Final hearing of
this appeal is not possible in near future. Therefore, it is prayed that remaining
jail sentence may be suspended and the appellants may be released on bail.
Learned G.A. for the respondent/State has objected the prayer and
prayed for rejection of the suspension of application of the appellants.
We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering
the evidence available on record against the appellant, coupled with the fact that
final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future, therefore, without
commenting any opinion on merits, we are inclined to suspend the remaining jail
sentence of appellants.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 29-04-
2023 12:33:02
Accordingly, I.A. No.3531/2023, is allowed.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
deposited, Appellants - Kripabai, Ganga Bai and Seema Bai, shall be
released on bail, on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one surety each in the like amount
to the satisfaction of trial Court, for their appearance before the Registry of this
Court firstly on 20.07.2023, and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the
Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Shruti
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
Signing time: 29-04-
2023 12:33:02
