Smt. Mamta Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 12565 MP

                                                             1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                     CRA No. 5096 of 2023
                                            (SMT. MAMTA BAI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 04-08-2023
                                Mr. S.B. Lodhi - Advocate for the appellant.

                                Mr. Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.6567 of 2023, first application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of sole appellant - Mamta Bai.

Appellant - Mamta Bai stood convicted under Sections 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and under Sections 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three months imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,00/-, with default stipulation vide judgment o f conviction and order of sentence dated 27.03.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pichore, District Shivpuri (M.P.) in S.T.No.53/2018.

Appellant has so far undergone jail sentence of four months during trial and she is in custody since the date of the judgment.

A s per prosecution story, complainant - Devendra Singh (since

deceased) S/o Jagat Singh, his brother - Keshav Lodhi and Kiran Lodhi lodged an FIR that since the time Kiran Lodhi has started living with his brother Keshav Lodhi after demise of her husband nine months ago, the family members of deceased's husband, namely, Phool Singh, Kallu Lodhi, Deep Singh and Mamta developed animosity with his brother. On the fateful day, i.e. on 28/10/2018 at about 8:00 hours when complainant-Devendra went to the house of his sister-in- law Kiran Lodhi, then the accused persons, namely, Phool Singh, Kallu Lodhi, Deep Singh and Mamta Lodhi started hurling filthy abuses to him and on being Signature Not Verified Signed by: BARKHA SHARMA Signing time: 04-Aug-23 5:27:34 PM

objected, Kallu assaulted on his left shoulder by Luhangi, Deepsingh and Phool Singh assaulted him by Lathi causing injuries on his hands, back, head and both legs. Thereafter, his sister-in-law Kiran Lodhi came to save him, then accused Kallu, Deep Singh and Mamta also assaulted her and caused injuries on the body of Kiran. On the aforesaid FIR, investigation started. Upon collection of incriminating material, challan was filed and the case was put to sessions trial. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record has convicted the appellant and sentenced as aforesaid.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no allegation of causing any injury to the deceased - Devendra by the present appellant Mamta.

Instead, she is alleged to have caused injuries to her Bhabhi - Kiran. Therefore, her conviction under Sections 302/34 and 323/34 of IPC is wholly unwarranted. She is a lady aged about 40 years with two daughters at home. Her husband - Phool Singh has died during trial. There is no one to look after her daughters at home. Hence, prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant.

P e r contra, Ms. Gyanani while supporting the impugned judgment contends that her presence on spot is well evident not only from the FIR lodged by the deceased - Devendra, but also corroborated with the ocular evidence led in the Court i.e. PW-1 and PW-2. Hence, no case is made out for suspension of sentence.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon the rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case, but regard being had to the fact that appellant is a lady aged about 40 years, whose husband co-accused Phool Singh has died during trial and her two young daughters at home are alone with no one to look after them, besides

Signature Not Verified as read out from the FIR, the allegations against the appellant is only to cause Signed by: BARKHA SHARMA Signing time: 04-Aug-23 5:27:34 PM

injury to Kiran and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Accordingly, IA No.6567 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of the present appeal and she shall be released on bail subject to verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. She is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 03.10.2023 and thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                 (ROHIT ARYA)                             (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
                                    JUDGE                                          JUDGE

                          bj/-




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BARKHA
SHARMA
Signing time: 04-Aug-23
5:27:34 PM