Madhya Pradesh High Court
Maharaj Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 August, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA-9306-2018
(MAHARAJ SINGH & ANOTHER Vs . STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
DATED:- 09-08-2023
Shri Sushil Goswami- Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Rajesh Shukla - Additional Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:
Heard on I.A. No.13773/2023, 3rd application under Section 389 (1)
of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.2 - Chain Singh. The first and second applications for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellant
No.2- Chain Singh were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated
21/01/2020 and 29/04/2022 respectively.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 14/11/2018 passed
by II Additional Session Judge, Ganjbasoda, District-Vidisha (M.P.) in
Sessions Trial No.49/2017, whereby the appellant No.2- Chain Singh has
been convicted and sentenced as under:-
Section Sentence Fine (Rs.) Default Stipulation
302/34 of IPC Life Imprisonment 1000/- 6 Months RI
As per prosecution story, complainant- Amar Singh Kushwah
reported on 18/12/2016 at Police Station Tyonda to the effect that when
he, at about 8:00 PM in the night on 16/12/2016 having dinner, came to
his shop of Bindal-Machis situated at village Dhansinghpur Chak Road,
his brother Kundan Singh (for brevity "the deceased") came and asked him
to go to the house as his mother was calling him. Kundan Singh stayed at
the shop. At about 10:30 in the night complainant Amar Singh Singh heard
the screams of the deceased for rescue, rushing from Mata Chowk area,
that Chain Singh and Maharaj Singh having poured kerosene had set him
ablaze. The deceased is said to have crossed the house and landed towards
the field of Karan Singh Kushwah. On seeing this, the complainant and his
other brothers rushed to the deceased and tried to extinguish fire by
throwing a blanket on the body of the deceased. The deceased suffered
burn injuries on various parts of the body. The deceased was rushed to
Gyaraspur hospital by calling 108 Ambulance from where he was referred
to Vidisha Hospital and thereafter he died homicidal death. On such
report, FIR was lodged and the investigation was set in motion. Statements
of witnesses were recorded. The Investigating Officer, after collecting
incriminating material, completed the investigation and filed challan. The
case was committed for trial to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court
upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record convicted and
sentenced the present appellant as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellants, while taking exception to the
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, inter alia,
submits that all witnesses, namely- Amar Singh (PW-1) brother, Devi
Singh (PW-2), Karan Singh Kushwah (PW-5) brother, Rajkumari (PW-6)
wife, Khuman Bai (PW-7) mother of the deceased have turned hostile and
belied the story of prosecution. It is further submitted that the statement of
the wife of the deceased is referred in para 14 of the judgment impugned
wherein she is stated to have deposed that her husband was a habitual
drunkard and on the fateful day he had consumed liquor. He was a man of
hot temperament and fickle-mindedness. He used to have some sort of
animosity with the accused. Khuman Bai, mother of the deceased (PW-7),
also came to know about alleged incident on the next day morning. It is
submitted that in such circumstances, it is highly doubtful that the present
appellant has committed the alleged crime of pouring kerosene on the
deceased and setting him ablaze. The entire conviction is based upon the
dying declaration of the deceased allegedly recorded by the Naib Tahsildar
Dhirendra Gupta (PW-17), however, there is nothing on record to suggest
as to how he arrived at the hospital to record the statement of the
deceased. This piece of evidence is weak in nature. Hence, the conviction
and sentence awarded by the learned Trial Court is wholly unwarranted. It
is further submitted that co-appellant- Maharaj Singh has already been
extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant on bail by this
Court vide order dated 13/07/2023. Appeal is of the year 2018 and there is
no likelihood of early disposal of instant appeal in the near future. Thus,
on these grounds, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
present appellant No.2 may be extended the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General while supporting
the judgment impugned inter alia submits that even if the brothers, wife
and mother of the deceased have turned hostile, however, in the light of
the dying declaration of the deceased wherein complicity of the present
appellant is writ large, the same was sufficient to hold conviction and
award sentence to the present appellant and thus, he prays for rejection of
the instant application as no exception can be taken in the matter of
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.2.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court
refrains from commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the
matter but regard being had to the fact that appellant No.2 has suffered
incarceration of about 06 Years & 06 Months, in the obtaining facts and
circumstances, appeal is of the year 2018 and there is no likelihood of its
early disposal, the application deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, we allow the application and it is directed that the jail
sentence of appellant No.2- Chain Singh shall remain suspended during
pendency of the present appeal and he be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs
Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine
amount. Appellant No.2 is directed to appear before the Registry of this
Court first on 12/09/2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed
in this behalf.
Accordingly, I.A. No.13773/2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
RAHUL Digitally signed by RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
SINGHrahul
GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=eac942476567cd1b39b3da46068403462fdf82ab676d0
cde4dee473fe77953f5,
pseudonym=68E0B84BAE73376CD071289B3D9FE728CE00D48
7,
PARIHAR
serialNumber=0275C4F803F94C47998BE5C534E21BDED910FD
4AB9D159B55575E814D05B2EED, cn=RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR
Date: 2023.08.10 13:40:34 +05'30'
