Madhya Pradesh High Court
Puran Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 August, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 5350 of 2022
(PURAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-08-2023
Shri Vivek Singh - Advocate for appellant.
Shri H.S.Rathore - Government Advocate for State.
Heard on 12044/2023, which is an application for urgent hearing.
Since the matter is taken up for hearing, therefore, application stands
disposed off being rendered infructuous.
Also heard on I.A.No.12043/2023, which is second application under
Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail
sentence on behalf of appellant No.2 Dinesh.
Appellant stands convicted vide judgment dated 27/05/2022 passed in
S.T.No. 100102/2016 by II ASJ, Jaora, District Ratlam under Sections 302/34
and 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been sentenced to undergo Life
Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and 03 years RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-
respectively with usual default stipulation.
As per prosecution story, on 21/06/2016 an unknown dead body was
recovered in the forest area. Marg No.0/2016 was registered under Section 174
of Cr.P.C. Postmortem of dead body was carried out and the cause of death
was found due to cardio respiratory failure and injuries on vital part of the
body. Since no one identified, therefore, the dead body was buried. Later on,
when deceased Bherulal did not return to the village, then a search was made
and the dead body was taken out and the dead body was identified by Jeevan
as his nephew Bherulal. According to the Jeevanlal this deceased Bherulal went
along with Puran Singh and Dinesh to Sabji Mandi but did not return back.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUNESHWAR
DATT
Signing time: 11-08-2023
18:17:37
2
Therefore, on the basis of last seen together, these two appellants /accused
persons were apprehended. Their statements were recorded under Section 27,
in which they could not give any valid explanation in this regard, therefore, they
are implicated in the offence.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is an innocent
person and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. No motive is
established in the matter, which is important in a case based on circumstantial
evidence. There is a delay in recording the statement of Jeevanlal in respect of
last seen together. During the trial appellant was on bail and he has not misused
the liberty granted to him. No weapon has been recovered from the possession
of the present appellant. There are material contradictions and omissions in the
statement of the witnesses. Looking to old pendency of the cases for
consideration, final conclusion of this appeal would take sufficient long time.
There is a strong case in favour of the appellant. Hence, the execution of the
remaining part of the jail sentence of the appellant be suspended till the final
disposal of this appeal.
P e r contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the
application for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection by submitting
that the trial Court after due consideration of the evidence available on record,
convicted the appellant. Hence, he is not entitled to grant benefit of suspension
of sentence.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the
allegation levelled against the appellant and also taking note of the fact that
appellant was on bail during the trial; there is no complaint that he has misused
the liberty granted to him; no weapon has been recovered form his possession;
no motive is established in the matter and final conclusion of the appeal will also
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUNESHWAR
DATT
Signing time: 11-08-2023
18:17:37
take sufficient long time. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
case, We deem it proper to suspend the remaining custodial sentence of this
appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No.12043/2023 is allowed and it is directed subject to
deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and subject to furnishing
personal bond by the appellant in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy
Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of learned trial Court, the execution of remaining custodial part of
the sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this
appeal.
The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before
the Registry of this Court on 18/12/2023 and on all such subsequent dates,
which are fixed in this behalf.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
BDJ
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUNESHWAR
DATT
Signing time: 11-08-2023
18:17:37
