Manoj @ Veeru vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 12817 MP

                                                               1
                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                     CRA No. 5854 of 2019
                                      (MANOJ @ VEERU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                         Dated : 08-08-2023
                               Mr. Priyank Choubey - Advocate for appellants.

                               Mr. Yogesh Dhande - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.6008 of 2023, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant No.1 - Manoj alias Veeru.

T he case of the prosecution is that on 06.02.2013 complainant's son

namely the deceased had purchased a second hand mobile from the accused and wanted to return it since the mobile was not working. The appellants came to his house and told him that they will change the mobile and took him somewhere. Thereafter, the deceased did not return. When the grandson of the complainant was going to Sultanganj for school, he identified the dead body of the deceased. The investigation was taken up. The charges were framed against the accused. On trial, they have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation as mentioned in the impugned judgment. Questioning the

same, the instant appeal was filed.

The instant application is filed by the appellant No.1 Manoj alias Veeru seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contends that the entire case of the prosecution is based upon circumstantial evidence. That there is no proof of appellant having committed any offence. However, the same is disputed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

On hearing the learned counsels, we do not find any merit in this Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 8/8/2023 6:30:14 PM

application. The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, which has been substantially proved by the prosecution before the trial court. On that basis, they have been convicted and the sentence has been effected.

So far as the period of custody is concerned, it is submitted that the appellant was on bail during the trial and, therefore, he has already undergone a custody of five years as on date. Even as on the period of custody, we do not find any ground to enlarge him on bail. The postmortem report indicates that there are as many as ten injuries sustained by the deceased. The prosecution has established the case beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, we do not find any

ground to enlarge the appellant on bail.

I.A. No.6008 of 2023 is accordingly dismissed.

                              (RAVI MALIMATH)                                       (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                CHIEF JUSTICE                                            JUDGE

                         sj




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 8/8/2023
6:30:14 PM