Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dinesh Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 August, 2023
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 5663 of 2023
(DINESH SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 03-08-2023
Shri Suraj Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Gaurav Singh Chouhan, learned Government Advocate for the
State.
Shri Gyanendra Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-objector.
Heard on I.A.No.8417/2023, which is first application for suspension of
jail sentence of the appellant Dinesh Sharma who stands convicted vide
judgment dated 27.03.2023 passed by the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge
(Special Judge POCSO), Indore (MP) in Special Session Trial No. 750/2016
for offence punishable under Section 302/120 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- and default
stipulation.
2. The prosecution case found to be proved is that on 15.07.2016, the
deceased Yasir @ Chhotu had gone to the shop of Dinesh Sharma-appellant
where he used to work. When he did not return, the complainant lodged a
missing person report. During investigation, it was found that the co-accused
namely Pawan, Akash and Rahul had killed the deceased-Yasir by inflicting
multiple knife injuries and thereafter, they had buried his dead body.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has no role
to play in the said offence since the deceased was working in his shop for quite
a long time. He has been implicated only on the basis of memorandum under
Section 27 of the Evidence Act of Chintu @ Raj who had stated that the
appellant-Dinesh Sharma had agreed to pay Rs. 5 lakhs to other co-accused
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/4/2023
12:04:41 PM
persons for committing the offence. He further submits that there is no
evidence on record to show that the involvement of appellant. Neither any
amount was paid to the co-accused persons for committing the crime nor he
was present at the spot. He has been falsely implicated in the case without any
rhyme or reason. The only reason appears to be the fact that the deceased was
a servant in his shop. Therefore, in such circumstances, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the conviction is bad in law and appellant is entitled for
grant of suspension of jail sentence.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/ State has opposed the prayer
for suspension of jail sentence and prays for its rejection.
5. Learned counsel for the objector has filed I.A.No. 9475/2023 which
is an application under Section 301(2) of the Cr.P.C. wherein it is stated that the
complainant has no objection in case appellant is granted bail.
6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case,
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I.A.No. 8417/2023 is
allowed and it is directed that upon depositing the fine amount (if not already
deposited) and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, the
substantive jail sentence of the appellant-Dinesh Sharma shall remain
suspended till the final disposal of the appeal and he shall be released on bail.
He shall appear before the concerned trial Court firstly on 13.12.2023 and on
all other subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this behalf by that Court.
7. List for final hearing in due course along with CRA.No.5467/2023.
Certified copy as per rules.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/4/2023
12:04:41 PM
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
vidya
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/4/2023
12:04:41 PM
