Madhya Pradesh High Court
Satyaprakash vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 August, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1301 of 2017
(SATYAPRAKASH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 16-08-2023
Shri Amit Lahoti - learned counsel for appellants.
Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla- learned Additional Advocate General for
respondent- State.
Per Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal:-
Heard on IA.No. 19689 of 2022, third application under Section 389(1)
of CrPC moved on behalf of appellant No.3 Dhara Singh for suspension of jail
sentence and grant of bail.
Vide judgment dated 8th of September, 2017 passed by Third Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhind in Sessions Trial No. 302 of 2014, the present appellant
has been convicted under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to
life imprisonment with fine of Rs 2,000/- and further convicted under Section
201 r/w Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo for three years rigorous
imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation. Both the sentences
have been directed to run concurrently.
Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 12-06-2014, Ramdas Chowkidar of
village informed Police Station Gormi to the effect that on seeing a crow-
croaking towards rugged mouza Aharoli, he went near the place i.e. Baghele Ka
Pura and an unknown lady was found dead whose throat and cars were cut. Her
complexion was found average tall and dark, whose body was lying dead with a
sharp weapon. On the above information, a dehati nalishi was recorded vide
Ex.P1 and on the spot, the dead body of aforesaid unknown lady was taken in
possession by the police and an inquest was recorded under Section 164 of
CrPC. Dead body panchnama was prepared in presence of witnesses and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/17/2023
1:09:39 PM
thereafter it was sent for its autopsy. Thereafter, accused Satyaprakash,
Satyaveer, Dhara Singh (present appellant no.3) and Brajesh were arrested vide
arrest memo Ex.P3 to Ex.P6. Statement of Satyaprakash was recorded in which
he stated that whom he and Satyaveer had brought from Morena on 08-06-2014
was murdered on 11-06-2014 and at about 03:00-04:00 in the morning of 12-06-
2014, the lady was attacked with axe and knife. The axe which Brajesh had
beheaded the lady, had taken with him after murder and the knife which he had
brought with him in his pocket had cut lady's nose. He went with accused
Satyaveer and kept deceased hidden at a little distance near Aharoli Ghat of
Kwari River where her saree was thrown. Memorandum of Dhara Singh was
also recorded vide Ex PI5 who told that the lady was physical relationship with
Satyaveer. From possession of accused Satyaprakash, knife with his blood-
stained shirt, from accused Satyaveer white blood- stained shirt, from accused
Brajesh an axe and from possession of Dhara Singh, a black coloured purse of
aforesaid deceased lady were recovered. After completion of investigation and
other formalities, charge sheet was filed before the competent Court from where
the case was committed to Sessions Court for its trial. After conclusion of trial,
trial Court convicted and sentenced present appellant along with other co-
accused for commission of aforesaid offence, as mentioned above.
It is contended by learned counsel for the present appellant that the trial
Court has committed an error in convicting and sentencing the present appellant
only on the basis of his memoradum from whose possession a black colour
purse of deceased lady was recovered and except this, there is no evidence
against him. Either there is any independent witness or any relative witness have
been examined by prosecution in order to establish present appellant guilty of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/17/2023
1:09:39 PM
aforesaid offence. Even otherwise, there is no last seen evidence available on
record. It is further contended that all seizure witnesses as well as arrest memo
witnesses have turned hostile and did not support the prosecution story. There
is no direct evidence to connect the present appellant with alleged crime and
case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is further contended that present
appellant has already served near about six years two months jail incarceration
This appeal is of year 2017 and its final outcome will take time. Hence, prayed
for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Learned counsel for State by supporting the impugned judgment
submitted that it is a case of brutal murder of a lady and considering the nature
of offence and evidence available on record, present appellant is not entitled for
benefit of suspension of jail sentence and prayed for rejection of application.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case but
without commenting upon merits of the case, IA deserves to be and is hereby
allowed. It is directed that jail sentence of the 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 22nd
December, 2023 and on such further dates as may be fixed by the Office in
this regard till disposal of the appeal.
Aforesaid IA stands closed.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/17/2023
1:09:39 PM
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 8/17/2023
1:09:39 PM
