Madhya Pradesh High Court
Udaybhan Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. on 21 August, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 924 of 2015
(UDAYBHAN YADAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.)
Dated : 21-08-2023
Shri Atul Gupta - Advocate for appellants.
Shri A.K. Nirankari - Public Prosecutor for State.
Shri Abhishek Tiwari - Advocate for complainant.
Heard on I.A. No.14966/2023, which is fifth application under Section
389(1) of CrPC for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of
appellant No. 2 - Rishi Yadav.
Appellant's first, second, third and fourth applications were dismissed as
withdrawn as withdrawn vide orders dated 25.03.2019, 07.08.2020, 10.12.2021
and 17.12.2021 respectively.
T he appellant has so far undergone jail sentence for 13 years without
remission and about 16 years and 3 months with remission.
Appellant - Rishi Yadav stood convicted under Section 302/149 of IPC
and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/-; under Section
148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three years R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/-;
under Section 25(1-b)(a) of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo three years
R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/-and under Section 27 of Arms Act and sentenced to
undergo three years R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/-and imposed fine of Rs.5,000/-
with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 07.09.2015 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Sabalgarh,
District Morena in Sessions Trial No.327/2010.
Prosecution story, as found, proved, is that on 01.07.2020 in the evening
complainant, his father Motilal, cousin brothers Jagdish Singh and Vijay Singh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 21-08-2023
16:19:58
2
were going on two motorcycles from their house situated at Rithoniya to
Kailaras Market for purchasing Tassal and Fawada. One motorcycle was being
driven by his father Motilal, on which, complainant's cousin brother Vijay Singh
was sitting and another motorcycle was being driven by the complainant, on
which, his cousin brother Jagdish Singh was sitting as a pillion rider. At about
06:45 PM, when they reached in front of Janpad Panchayat, the co-convicts
Sughar Singh and Bhagwan Singh thrown chilli powder on the eyes of Motilal
and Vijay Singh, as a result whereof, they fell down. Thereafter, appellant along
with all other co-accused persons, who were present on the spot, surrounded
them and co-convicts Sughar Singh exhorted appellant Rishi Yadav to kill the
deceased. Thereafter, appellant fired from his pistol on the deceased Motilal, as
a result of which, he sustained injury on the left portion of back side of his
head. On the basis of such report, an offence was registered by Police Station
Kailaras, District Morena at Crime No.194/2010 under Sections 307, 147, 148,
149, 506-B, 341 of IPC and the matter was investigated into. Upon completion
of investigation, challan was filed. The Sessions Court on appreciation of
evidence placed on record convicted and sentenced the present appellant.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment inter alia supported the instant application primarily on the ground of
long jail incarceration as so far, appellant has undergone jail incarceration of 13
years without remission. That apart, it is submitted that Sessions Court has not
appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. The judgment
suffers from surmises and conjectures. It is also submitted that the co-
appellants Udaybhan Yadav and Jagdish have been extended the benefit of
suspension of sentence vide order dated 19.02.2016 and co-appellantts Bharat
and Bhota @ Abhay have been extended the benefit of suspension of sentence
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 21-08-2023
16:19:58
3
vide order dated 08.02.2016 respectively. The appeal being of 2015 is not likely
to be decided in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel submits that
the present appellant may also be extended the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the impugned judgment submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contentions so advanced touching the merits of
the case, but regard being had to the fact that present appellant so far has
undergone jail incarceration of 13 years without remission, and the appeal is not
likely to be decided in the near future, we are of the view that present appellant
is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.14966/2023 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of appellant No.2 - Rishi Yadav shall remain suspended
during pendency of the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject
to verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing
a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, provided
he is not in custody in connection with other criminal cases.
Appellant No.2 is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court
first on 10.10.2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this
behalf.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 21-08-2023
16:19:58
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
Abhi
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 21-08-2023
16:19:58
