Madhya Pradesh High Court
Parmal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 9909 of 2023
(PARMAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 07-08-2023
Shri Jitendra Singh - learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri A.P.S. Tomar- learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No. 14402/2023, first application under Section 389
(1) of Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the appellant seeking suspension of sentence
and grant of bail.
Appellant stands convicted under Section 304(a) of IPC and sentenced
to undergo one year's RI with fine of Rs. 10000/-, under Section 279 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo three months' RI with fine of Rs.1000/-, under
Section 337(two counts) of IPC and sentenced to undergo one-one month's RI
with fine of Rs.500/-500/- and under Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicles Act and
sentenced to undergo one month's RI with fine of Rs.1000/- with default
stipulation vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10/07/2023 passed
by Additional Sessions Judge, Chanderi District Ashoknagar in Sessions Trial
No. 71/2017.
Learned Counsel for appellant submits that the impugned judgment
passed by learned Trial Court is based on assumption, conjecture and
surmises. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in convicting and
sentencing the present appellant without appreciating the prosecution evidence
properly. There are material contractions and omissions in the evidence of
witnesses. He has already undergone four months' jail incarceration during trial.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AVINASH
BHARGAV
Signing time: 08-08-2023
10:04:00 AM
The appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty so
granted to him. Fine amount has already been deposited by the appellant. The
jail sentence of appellant was already suspended by learned Trial Court, under
Section 389(3) of the Cr.P.C. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in
n e a r future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged
on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent State opposed the
application and prayed for its rejection. He contends that appellant is convicted
on proper appreciation of evidence. No case is made out for suspension of
sentence.
Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties but without commenting
upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that
application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of
this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing personal bond
in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court and also
subject to deposit of the fine amount (if not already deposited) for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 27.10.2023 and on further
dates as may be directed by the Registry in that regard.
Accordingly, I.A. No.14402/2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
Call for the record of the Court below and list thereafter for final hearing
in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AVINASH
BHARGAV
Signing time: 08-08-2023
10:04:00 AM
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Avi
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AVINASH
BHARGAV
Signing time: 08-08-2023
10:04:00 AM
