Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 August, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 8960 of 2022
(VINOD AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 04-08-2023
Shri Kunal Dubey - Advocate for appellant No.1 and Ms. Indu Pandey
- Advocate for appellants No.2 to 4.
Shri Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for respondent-State.
Heard on I.A. No.18847 of 2022, an application under Section 389(1)
of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellants
aris ing out of judgment dated 21.9.2022 delivered in Sessions Trial
No.1900435/2016 by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen, District Raisen
(MP).
The appellants have been convicted under Section 307/149 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- each, under
Section 325/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of
Rs.500/- each, under Section 323/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for
one year with fine of Rs.500/- each, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that they have been falsely
implicated in the case. There is no evidence to connect the appellants with the
alleged crime. Learned counsel for the appellants after referring para 7 of the
deposition of wittiness Hemraj (PW-5) submits that in the instant case
complainant party was armed at the time of incident and they were aggressor.
The appellant No.5-Akshay is alleged to have assaulted Vipin with lathi and in
the assault Vipin is alleged to have sustained injuries but there is no medical
report with respect to injuries sustained by Vipin and neither any doctor has
been examined with respect to same. The weapon allegedly recovered were not
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD IRFAN
SIDDIQUI
Signing time: 8/8/2023
11:04:20 AM
sent to the concerned doctor for opinion whether the injuries sustained by the
injured person might have been caused by the said weapons. It is also urged
that appellant No.1-Vinod was not carrying any weapon at the time of incident
and only role attributed to him that he caught hold Virendra. No specific role is
attributed to appellant No.2 - Premnarayan. Appellant No.1 and 5 came on the
spot and alleged to have taken part in the later part of the incident and there is
no evidence showing any active involvement of appellants in the instant incident.
The final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Therefore, it has
been prayed that the jail sentence of the appellants be suspended and they be
released on bail.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Advocate on the basis of
objection.
Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case
and looking to the evidence available on record, coupled with the fact that final
hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining
jail sentence of the appellants.
Accordingly, I.A No.18847 of 2022 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of appellants are hereby suspended and it is directed that
appellants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each with separate solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further
direction to appear before the trial Court, District Raisen o n 9 th of
October, 2023 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial Court
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD IRFAN
SIDDIQUI
Signing time: 8/8/2023
11:04:20 AM
in this regard during the pendency of this Appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
irfan
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MOHD IRFAN
SIDDIQUI
Signing time: 8/8/2023
11:04:20 AM
