Madhya Pradesh High Court
Toofansingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 August, 2023
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 11785 of 2022
(TOOFANSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 02-08-2023
Shri Nilesh Dave, counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Bharti Lakkad, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No. 8566/2023, which is second application for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the appellant-
Toofan Singh. The earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn.
2. Appellant stands convicted by the judgment dated 07.12.2022 passed by the
Second Additional Sessions Judge, Garoth, District Mandsaur, MP in S.T.No. 74/2019
under Section 306 and 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI
for 7 years and 3 years, respectively with fine of Rs. 1000/- for each offence and
default stipulation.
3. As per the case of the prosecution, Kushal Bai-wife of the appellant
committed suicide by consuming poison. It is alleged that the appellant used to harass
and torture the deceased and therefore, she committed suicide. The trial Court has
relied on the statement of Meherban Singh (PW-1) who is the brother of the deceased.
He stated that he talked with the appellant on telephone and appellant refused to send
the deceased to his house and further said that she will not be sent to his house alive.
The other witnesses have made omnibus allegations against the appellant regarding
torture and harassment.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that if the statement of Meherban
Singh (PW-1) is considered by this Court in paragraph 4 and 5, he has stated he had
gone to the house of the deceased one day before the incident. She was alone at her
house, but has not stated anything to him. Further, the incident had taken place on
14.01.2019 and the deceased died on 21.01.2019 and during this period, she was
conscious but she did not make statement to anyone regarding harassment and torture
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/2/2023
5:46:55 PM
by the appellant. Neither suicide note nor dying declaration is available in this case.
The appellant has undergone total incarceration period of more than year. He was on
bail during during trial and did not misuse the liberty. Hence, it is prayed that
application for suspension of sentence be allowed.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State opposes the prayer.
6. After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration the
statement of Meherban Singh (PW-1) that he had gone to the house of the deceased one
day prior to the incident but she did not disclose anything against the present appellant.
Further, she remained conscious for a period of seven days but did not make any
allegation against the appellant. The appellant was on bail during trial and did not
misuse the liberty, 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 I.A.No.8566/2023 is allowed and the jail sentence
of appellant-Toofansingh is suspended.
7. It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
deposited, the appellant shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) alongwith a solvent surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court. He shall appear before the Registry of
this Court firstly on 09.10.2023 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the
Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this revision.
8. Accordingly I.A.No. 8564/2023 for urgent hearing also stands disposed of.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
vidya
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/2/2023
5:46:55 PM
