Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abdul Mazid vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 August, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4 of 2020
(ABDUL MAZID AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-08-2023
Shri Siddharth Datt - Advocate for the appellant No.3- Qamrunnisha.
Shri Ajay Shukla- Government Advocate for respondent - State.
Heard on I.A. No.18054/2023 an application under Section 389(1) of the
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.3
Qamrunnisha arising out of judgment dated 19.12.2019 delivered in
S.T.No.335 /2008, by VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa.
T he appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34 of I.P.C. and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1,000/-,
under Section 304-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for life with fine of Rs.1,000/- and section 498-A of IPC and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/-, with default
stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this appellant is Jethani of
the deceased. This Court was kind enough in suspending the jail sentence of
appellant No.4-Rafiqunnisha by order dated 10.04.2023. A conjoint reading of
dying declaration Ex.P-5 and Ex.D-3 and Ex.D-4 makes it clear that this
appellant is similarly situated qua appellant No.4 -Rafiqunnisha. Appellant is a
married woman and appellant No.4 -Rafiqunnisha is the real daughter of present
appellant. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Thus, the
remaining jail sentence of present appellant may be suspended. To elaborate, it
is submitted that the deceased in dying declaration has described the same role
of this appellant if compared with appellant No.4- Rafiqunnisha. The name of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/23/2023
10:30:25 AM
present appellant does not find place in the case diary statement of Shahzadi
Ex.D-3 and Ex.D-4.
Learned G.A. opposed the prayer but did not dispute the existence of
factum of parity.
This Court while granting benefit of suspension of sentence to appellant
No.4 Rafiqunnisha recorded as under:
"Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per
prosecution story the accused persons forcibly poured
kerosene on the body of deceased and set her ablaze. It is
submitted that the main allegation is against the husband of
deceased i.e. Israr who tied her and poured kerosene oil
and Mohd. Mazeed (Jeth of deceased) poured kerosene oil
and set her ablaze. As per prosecution story all the accused
persons took active role in the said incident. Learned
counsel for appellant submits that appellant is aged about
21 years (in the year 2007). Appellant No.4 is daughter of
Jeth (Mohd. Mazeed). She had not played any active role.
Her name is not mentioned in statement recorded under
Section 161 of CrPC by Shahzadi (PW-4), sister of the
deceased who was allegedly present at the time of incident.
By taking this court to the order of suspension dated
20.01.2010 passed in CRA No.2065/2009 whereby benefit
of suspension of sentence was given to co-accused Mohd.
Sharif, it is alleged that for the same reason present
appellant deserves similar benefit. To elaborate, it is
submitted that Shahzadi in her case diary statement Ex.D/3
and Ex.D/4 did not take the name of present appellant No.4
although by relation her name was taken in the court
statement. The appellant remained in custody for about 3
years and three months. Final hearing of this appeal is not
possible in near future. Considering the aforesaid remaining
jail sentence may be suspended.
Learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer
on the strength of objection and submits that in view of
clear dying declaration, the bail application may be
dismissed.
It is seen that this Court granted benefit of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/23/2023
10:30:25 AM
suspension of sentence to co-accused Mohd. Sharif on
the ground that Shahzadi (PW-4) did not take his name
in case diary statement. Prima facie similar is the case
of present appellant.
Considering the aforesaid and without expressing
any conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we
deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of
the appellant. Accordingly, I.A No.22366/2022 is
allowed."
Considering the principles of parity, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of appellant No.3- Qamrunnisha. Accordingly IA No.
18054/2023 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed
that appellant No.3 Qamrunnisha be released on bail on her furnishing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only)
with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
with a further direction to appear before the trial Court Rewa o n 30th
October, 2023 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial Court
in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
sarathe
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/23/2023
10:30:25 AM
