Pappu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 13814 MP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR CRA No. 6088 of 2023 (PAPPU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 23-08-2023 Shri Munna Lal Tomar, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Dheeraj Kumar Budholiya-P.L. appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

Heard on the question of admission.

This appeal appears to be arguable, hence, it is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A. No. 10466 of 2023, which is first application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved by the appellant/Pappu.

This Criminal Appeal assails the judgment dated 10.04.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Lateri, Dist. Vidisha (M.P.) in S.T. No. 07/2019, whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 307 & 324 of IPC to undergo maximum rigorous imprisonment of five years with maximum fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has wrongly

convicted the appellant without appreciating the evidence properly. It is further submitted that offence was committed by the appellant as well as co-accused Charan Singh, however, the injured PW/7-Dayal Singh as well as other prosecution witnesses PW/1-Chunnilal Ahirwar, PW/2 Ramkali, PW/3- Kaushalya and PW/4- Prem Singh have not supported the case of the Signature Notprosecution Verified in toto and have turned hostile in respect to Charan Singh and Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR stated that at the time of incident Charan Singh was not present at the spot of Signing time: 24-08-2023 11:45:58 AM

incident. This variation in the statement of prosecution witnesses makes the entire prosecution story suspicious. Seizure of the Axe is also not proved by the evidence of PW/1-Chunnilal Ahirwar. FSL report is also not conclusive. It is further submitted that appellant has already served seven months of incarceration out of total jail sentence of five years. This appeal is likely to take long time to conclude. Hence, prayer is made to suspend the jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

Counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available

on record.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without commenting on merits of the case, I.A. No. 10466 of 2023 is hereby allowed. Subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he be released on bail. He is further directed to mark his appearance before the Office of this Court o n 14.12.2023 and on subsequent dates given by the Office in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

List the case for final hearing in due course. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for compliance.

Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions. Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 24-08-2023 11:45:58 AM (SUNITA YADAV)

JUDGE Durgekar

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Signing time: 24-08-2023 11:45:58 AM