Afjal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13391 MP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE CRA No. 4397 of 2022 (AFJAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 17-08-2023 Shri S.K.Meena, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri K. K. Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the State.

Heard on I.A.No. 11909/2022, which is first application under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. filed by the appellant-Afzal who stands convicted vide judgment dated 27.04.2022 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Badnagar,

District Ujjain in Session Trial No. 210/2019 under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and five years RI, respectively with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- and default stipulations.

2. The prosecution case found to be proved is that on 12.06.2019 at night, the appellant, his wife Faridabi (since deceased) and their children were sleeping. At midnight between 12:00 to 02:00 am, the appellant killed his wife Faridabi by hanging.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case only on the basis of memorandum recorded

under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The trial Court did not consider the contradictions and omissions in the statement of prosecution witnesses. Even the defence version has been discarded. In fact, the appellant was not present on the spot when the incident took place. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and the chain is not complete. Only the apprehension and the fact that the appellant is the husband of the deceased cannot be the ground to implicate him in the crime. Hence, prayer is made to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant and release him on bail.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SREEVIDYA Signing time: 8/18/2023 5:16:28 PM

4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the plea of alibi gets falsified from the statement of Shanu (PW-2) who has categorically stated that the appellant was present on the spot at the time of incident. The burden of proof lies on the appellant/husband to explain as to how the deceased died in the night when there was no one else in his house except the family members.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the custody period of the appellant, at this stage we do not find any substantial ground to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant and release him on bail.

7. Accordingly, I.A.No. 11909/2022 stands dismissed.

                             (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)                                    (PRANAY VERMA)
                                      JUDGE                                               JUDGE

                          vidya




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 8/18/2023
5:16:28 PM