Umesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14255 MP

                                                             1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 2868 of 2015
                                                (UMESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 29-08-2023
                                Shri Samar Singh Rajput - Advocate for appellant.

                                Shri Yogesh Dhande - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.20979 of 2022.

This is the second repeat application seeking for suspension of sentence and bail filed on behalf of appellant/accused Umesh who has been convicted

under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for Life and fine of Rs.3,000/-; under Section 201 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-; and under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulations as mentioned in the impugned judgment.

The earlier application was dismissed on merits by the order dated 29.01.2016. There is no changed circumstances to consider the application on merits. However, what is being contended is that the accused is in custody for a period of about 12 years 6 months. Hence, he pleads that the custody period

may be taken into consideration while enlarging the accused on bail. The same is disputed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

On hearing learned counsels, we are of the view that the accused would be entitled for bail on the ground of period of detention. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2021 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.4633 of 2021 (Saudan Singh vs. The State of U.P. and others) has come to the view that the period of custody is one of the grounds to be taken into consideration while considering the application for bail, however, there are certain exceptions to the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 8/29/2023 6:17:51 PM

same. We do not find that any of the exceptions are applicable to the appellant. Since he has already undergone a period of almost 12 years in jail, we deem it just and necessary to enlarge him on bail on that ground. Consequently, the application (I.A. No.20979 of 2022) filed by accused/appellant is allowed.

Accused/appellant - Umesh is directed to be enlarged on bail subject to deposit of the fine amount and on he furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court/concerned Court on 21.11.2023 and thereafter on such other subsequent dates as may be fixed in that behalf.

                               (RAVI MALIMATH)                                       (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                 CHIEF JUSTICE                                            JUDGE

                          sj




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 8/29/2023
6:17:51 PM