Pradeep Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13648 MP

                                                               1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                       CRA No. 5167 of 2023
                                             (PRADEEP SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 22-08-2023
                                 Shri Sankalp Kochar - Advocate for appellant.

                                 Shri Alok Agnihotri - Govt. Advocate for respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.17439/23, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to Pradeep Sharma-appellant/accused, who has been convicted by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Sohagpur District

Narmadapuram in Sessions Trial No. 72/2016 dated 21-03-2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302/34, 201 and 404 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, RI for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, RI for 7 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and RI for 3 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- respectively with default stipulations. The sentences to run concurrently.

As per the counsel for the appellant, the prosecution story in short is that on 20-04-2016, Leena Sharma came to village Dudadeh Sohagpur for demarcation of her agricultural land, which is situated at village Dudadeh and on 23-04-2016 demarcation of land was done by the revenue authorities and the

appellant-Pradeep Sharma was found to be encroacher of 10.41 acres of her land and therefore, on 29-04-2016, Leena Sharma along with labourers started fencing her land. At that time, at about 9:00- 9:30 AM, Pradeep Sharma along with servants Gorelal and Rajendra reached the spot and stopped her from fencing work on the land and during this dispute/quarrel the appellant/co- accused persons gave blow and beating by stones and sticks to Leela Sharma in Kamti Forest with the help of Gorelal and Rajendra. The appellant followed the tractor-trolley by motor-cycle in the forest and then they buried her dead Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 25-08-2023 17:38:08

body.

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that as per prosecution story, Pradeep Sharma misguided the police person and threw his mobile phone and thereafter, made a false story and on 05-05-2016, lodged a missing person report of Leena Sharma. Therefore, a missing person report No. 20/16 (Ex. P/90 ) was registered and during inquiry on the basis of mobile call details, inquiry was done and as per Ex. P/18 to P/20, body of the deceased Leena Sharma was recovered from Kamti Forest vide Ex. P/7. Spot Merg. No. 0/16 under Section 174 Cr.P.C was registered vide Ex.P/56. Thereafter, the police conducted the investigation and after investigation, charge-sheet was

filed. The appellant denied the charges, trial was conducted and after trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced as hereinabove.

The ground of appeal is that there is no reliable evidence on which, the appellant can be found guilty. The prosecution has failed miserably to produce the reliable evidence to bring home the guilt of the appellant hence, prays for grant of suspension of sentence. It is also argued that the appellant is innocent but, has been in judicial custody from 14-05-2016 to 18-05-2016 and from 18- 05-2016 to 22-02-2017 i.e. 286 days and from the date of judgment ie. 21-03- 2023 till date.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State supports the impugned judgment and submits that there is no ground to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant imposed by the learned trial Court.

Perused the record.

The learned trial court as per paragraph-173 of the judgment has convicted the co-accused Gorelal and Rajendra also for the murder of Leena

Signature Not Verified Sharma. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 25-08-2023 17:38:08

submitted that multiple memorandums under Section 27 of Evidence Act have been recorded, which is impermissible as per law but legally there is no bar for taking multiple memorandum under Section 27 of evidence Act, if the police officer takes the first memorandum and as per memorandum nothing is recovered from the spot and no article is seized, then the police can always investigate the matter further and take a second or third memorandums.

Learned counsel for the appellant strongly argued that the body of the deceased was in decomposed condition and wild animals in the forest had eaten the body parts but, prima facie, the photographs attached in the record of the trial Court does not support this contention of the appellant. On the point of identification, as per paragraph-18 of the judgment of the learned trial Court, on the basis of DNA report Ex. P/143 of the deceased, it is found that DNA was of deceased and it matches with Hema Sharma DNA, who is relative of the deceased. The body was identified and proved as that of Hema Sharma. At this juncture, it would not be out of place to mention that a naked dead body was buried in the forest then, some part/skin of the dead body may have decomposed or might have been eaten by animals or bacteria present in the soil that is why DNA sampling was done. The motive of the crime has been found to be proved by the learned trial Court as per paragraph-26 of the judgment. Infact, according to Pradeep @ Fatehsingh (PW-1 ), a suggestion was given

that the appellant-Pradeep Sharma requested the deceased Leena Sharma that he is also getting his land demarcated and then she can do the fencing and this suggestion was accepted by the deceased Leena Sharma.

Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the judgment of Balwan Singh Vs. State of Chhatisgarh and another (2019) 7 SCC 781 in which, Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 25-08-2023 17:38:08

from paragraph-12 to 28, the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down the principle that in criminal trial, clues and tell-tale signs/forensics, bloodmarks/trail and blood stains, failure to establish origin of blood as being of human origin and its blood group and its effect on prosecution case held that the same has to be ascertained in the facts of circumstances of each case and there is no fixed formula for the same and looking to the factual position of the case, the Hon'ble Apex Court allowed the appeal.

Last limb of the argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that some witnesses have turned hostile, who are workers of the Municipal Corporation, and they knew that a dead body was lying in the forest one day prior to the date of recovery of dead body. On this aspect, it can be said that to recover a dead body lying in the forest, if the persons/staff were informed earlier that they should be prepared to go into the forest to recover the body then, this is not something which is unusual or on this ground alone an acquittal can be made.

Hence, after considering all evidence before the trial Court and looking to the submissions of parties and in view of that while considering of suspension of sentence very detailed and minute evaluation of evidence of parties is not done, therefore, without commenting finally on the merits of appeal, this court finds that this is not a fit case in which suspension of sentence can be granted. Hence, IA No. 17439/23 stands dismissed.

                                (SUJOY PAUL)                               (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
                                   JUDGE                                            JUDGE

                           PG




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 25-08-2023
17:38:08