Ramkrishan Urf Ramkishan Jaat vs State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14086 MP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR CRA No. 7318 of 2023 (RAMKRISHAN URF RAMKISHAN JAAT AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 28-08-2023 Shri J.P. Singroul - Advocate for the appellants No.1 to 4.

Shri Vinod Tiwari - Deputy Government Advocate for the State. Shri Dharmendra Pandey - Advocate for objector.

Heard on I.A.No.15794 of 2023, which is first application filed on behalf of the appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The appellant No.1 has been convicted by the trial Court under Section 326/34 of IPC and appellant No.2. has been convicted under Section 326/34 of IPC and Section 25(1-kha)(kha) of Arms Act, appellant No.3 is convicted under Section 326/34 of IPC 25(1-kha)(kha) of Arms Act and appellant No.4 has been convicted under Section 326/3.4 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years and 1 years respectively with fine for Rs.2000/- and Rs.1000/- respectively with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record

and committed error in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offences. He further submits that appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that applicants and victim have arrived at compromise and has filed an application for compromise. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions, omissions and embellishments in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. Appellants are in custody and final disposal of this appeal will take considerable time to conclude, therefore, the custodial sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he may be released on bail. Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 8/29/2023 1:41:31 PM

On the other hand learned counsel for the State as well as objector have opposed the contentions raised by the counsel for the appellants and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and judgment of the Court below.

In this interim application, the learned counsel for the appellants have argued for suspension of sentence on the ground that compromise has been reached between the parties which has been placed in the record along with the application to seek permission to compromise. In the light of this application, the matter was sent to Registrar J-II for verification for compromise who has

reported that the matter has been compromised between the applicants and complainant Aditya Jat and the compromise was voluntary and without duress. Since the applicants have been convicted under Section 326 of IPC and Section 25(1-B)(B) of Arms Act and both the offences are non-compoundable in nature. Therefore, looking to the fact that compromise has been reached voluntarily between the parties, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each wit h one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of appellants No.1, 2, 3 and 4 shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before the trial Court concerned on 06.11.2023 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.

List for final hearing in due course.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 8/29/2023 1:41:31 PM

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE DevS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 8/29/2023 1:41:31 PM