Deviram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13500 MP

                                                             1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 842 of 2012
                                          (DEVIRAM AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 18-08-2023
                                Shri Vivek Baderiya - Advocate for appellants.

                                Shri A.S. Baghel - Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.

Heard on I.A. No.13155 of 2022.

This is the first application seeking for suspension of sentence and bail filed on behalf of appellant no.1 Deviram and appellant no.2 Mukam Singh, who

have been convicted under Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for three months each, further convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for Life and fine of Rs.5000/- each and further convicted under Section 506(Part-II) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for three years and fine of Rs.1000/- each with default stipulations vide impugned judgment dated 29.02.2012 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen in Sessions Trial No.66 of 2011.

The case of prosecution is that on 02.09.2010 at about 4:00 pm, the deceased had come to village Baheda with his daughter. He left her in her

husband's house. Thereafter, when he returned to his house, then his wife stated that her father had not yet returned back. They went in search of him. Thereafter, they found that the deceased was assaulted with various injuries. They took him to the hospital but he died on the way. The eye-witness (P.W-7) narrated the incident to the complainant. Thereafter, the complaint was registered.

Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the accused-appellants have been in custody for about 12 years and 11 months. Hence, he pleads for Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 8/18/2023 5:29:27 PM

suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The application is opposed by the Public Prosecutor. He contends that the period of detention cannot constitute a ground for enlarging them on bail.

However, on hearing learned counsels, we are of the view that the case of the appellants is required to be considered for bail with regard to the period of detention.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2021 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.4633 of 2021 (Saudan Singh vs. The State of U.P. and others) has come to the view that the period of custody is one of the grounds to be taken into consideration while considering the application for bail. However,

there are certain exceptions to the same. We do not find that any of the exceptions therein is applicable to the appellants. Since they have already undergone a period of about 12 years and 11 months in jail, we deem it just and necessary to enlarge them on bail on that ground. Consequently, the application (I.A. No.13155 of 2022) filed by accused/appellants is allowed.

Accused/appellant no.1 Deviram and appellant no.2 Mukam Singh - are directed to be enlarged on bail subject to deposit of the fine amounts and on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the trial Court/concerned Court on 21.11.2023 and thereafter on such other subsequent dates as may be fixed in that behalf.

                                  (RAVI MALIMATH)                                     (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                    CHIEF JUSTICE                                          JUDGE

                          julie

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JULIE SINGH
Signing time: 8/18/2023
5:29:27 PM