Vikrant Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 12626 MP

                                     --1--


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        AT INDORE

                          CRA No. 7072 of 2023
                (VIKRANT KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



Dated : 04.08.2023

      Shri Devdeep Singh- Advocate for the appellant.
      Shri Sudhanshu Vyas- Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Shri Himanshu Joshi- Advocate for the respondent No.2.

(1) Heard on I.A. No.7991/2023, which is the 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 Appellant-Vikrant Kumar. (2) The appellant has been convicted vide judgment dated 11.05.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, Vyapam Cases (CBI), Indore in S.T. No.799/2014 and sentenced as under:-

Imprisonment in Section & Act Imprisonment Fine lieu of fine amount 419 of IPC 3 years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 6 months R.I. 420 of IPC 4 years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 6 months R.I. 467 IPC 5 Years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 6 months R.I.

468 IPC 3 Years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 6 months R.I.

471 IPC 3 Years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 6 months R.I.

201 IPC 2 Years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 months R.I.

120-B IPC 3 Years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 months R.I.

   3/4 of Manyata Prapt
                          2 Years R.I.       Rs.2,000/- 2 months R.I.
   Pariksha Adhiniyam

(3) As per prosecution case, on 17.10.2013 a written application was given

--2--

by the Dean of Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore at Police Station Sanyogitaganj, in which it is stated that one Ravindra S/o Vijaysingh student studying in the college told Professor Mrs. Rajni Soni that he had not given the PMT Exam, 2013, instead of him another student has given the exam and the admission process was completed by the same student. On this, Professor Mrs. Rajni Soni and Dr. Manohar Bhandari asked the said student to give the said thing in writing, thereafter he ran away. Accordingly, complaint was registered against the present appellant.

(4) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the case. The appellant has been made accused on the basis of memorandum under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. There are discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Hence, prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

(5) Learned counsel for State as well as counsel for the C.B.I. has opposed the prayer and prays for is rejection.

(6) We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

(7) Considering the short terms of the sentence, coupled with the fact that final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future, therefore, without commenting on merits, we are of the opinion that the jail sentence of appellant is liable to be suspended.

(8) Accordingly, I.A. No.7991/2023 is allowed. It is directed that subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, the

--3--

execution of remaining custodial part of the sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.

(9) The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before the trial Court on 22/12/2023 and thereafter on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this behalf.

Accordingly I.A. No.7991/2023 stands allowed and disposed of. C.C. as per rules.

        (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI )                                   (HIRDESH)
                JUDGE                                              JUDGE
N.R.




Digitally signed
by NARENDRA
KUMAR RAIPURIA
Date: 2023.08.04
19:09:03 +05'30'