Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ghanshyam (Jail Appeal) vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 August, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 937 of 2014
(GHANSHYAM (JAIL APPEAL) Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 10-08-2023
Shri Ashok Kumar Jain- Advocate counsel for appellant.
Shri A.K.Nirankari- Public Prosecutor for respondent- State.
Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:-
Heard on IA.No. 13024 of 2023, first application u/Sec. 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of
appellant Ghanshyam.
Vide judgment dated 25th of July, 2014 passed by Additional Sessions
Judge & Special Sessions Judge to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,
Guna in Sessions Trial No.134 of 2013, whereby the appellant has been
convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo LI with fine of
Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation.
Prosecution case, in short, is that complainant Kailash (PW1) along with
Brijesh and Harlal lodged an FIR with Police Station concerned vide Ex.P1
alleging therein that before eight - ten days, appellant accused Ghanshyam had
been asking for money which was borrowed by his father (deceased) and when
his father denied to give the same, because of enmity appellant accused used to
abuse his father and threatened to kill him. On 21-02-2013 at around 08:00 in
the morning when his father refused to give the borrowed money, the appellant-
accused threatened him to kill till evening. At around 08:00 in the night, when his
father deceased along his mother was sleeping nearby the courtyard, at that
time, accused appellant came and abused in filthy language. Thereafter,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/10/2023
2:48:09 PM
appellant- accused left the place and at around 09:30 in the night he reached
with a farsa and when his father was sleeping nearby the courtyard, the appellant
with intention of killing committed marpeet with his father. On hearing cries,
when his mother and wife reached there, it was found that appellant- accused
has already caused three injuries of farsa on his father at his neck due to which
blood started oozing out. After commission of murder, the appellant- accused
fled away from the place of occurrence. After sometime, witnesses, Banshilal,
Kamal and Preetam Rajput reached spot. It is alleged that accused- appellant
used to have enmity with his father over the borrowed money for this reason he
killed his father deceased by inflicting farsa blows. On the above basis, Crime
No.17 of 2013 was registered at PS Vijaypur. A report regarding death of the
deceased was lodged vide Ex.P12. Spot map was prepared and safina form
was prepared vide Ex.P3. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Blood
stained and plain soil were collected. All seized articles were sent for
examination to FSL. Accused appellant was arrested. After completion of
investigation and other formalities, police filed charge sheet before the
competent Court from where the case was committed to the Sessions Court for
its trial and after conclusion of trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced
appellant for the aforesaid offence as stated above.
Learned counsel for appellant submits that there are contradictions and
omissions in the evidence of complainant Kailash (PW1) and wife of deceased
Kamla Bai (PW3). The appellant- accused has been falsely implicated due to
previous enmity in regard to demand of borrowed money. The trial Court
without appreciating the prosecution evidence, has wrongly convicted the
present appellant for alleged offence. The appellant is 50 years old person and
there is no criminal antecedent against him. He is in custody since the date of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/10/2023
2:48:09 PM
passing of impugned judgment and since then he has already suffered more
than nine years of jail incarceration. This appeal is of the year 2014 and its final
outcome will take some time. Hence, prayed for suspension of jail sentence and
grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the suspension application and
prayed for its rejection.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the period of custody of the appellant but without commenting
upon merits of the case, IA deserves to be and is hereby allowed. It is directed
that jail sentence of appellant will remain under suspension subject to
verification that amount of fine has been deposited, on appellant's furnishing
bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court for his
appearance before the Principal Registrar of this Court on 13th December,
2023 and on such further dates as may be fixed by the Office in this regard till
disposal of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/10/2023
2:48:09 PM
