Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vikki Gujrati @ Bhola vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 December, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 7928 of 2021
(VIKKI GUJRATI @ BHOLA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 01-12-2023
Shri A.K. Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Vijay Sundaram - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.20188 of 2023, third application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant - Vikki Gujrati @ Bhola.
Present appellant stood convicted under Sections 302, 307 and 307 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.2000/-,
RI for five years with a fine of Rs.1,000/- and RI for three years with a fine of
Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 13.12.2021 passed by Seventh Additional Sessions Judge,
Gwalior (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.57/2017.
The present appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of more than 7
years.
As per prosecution story, at about 7:00 in the night on 5.10.2016
while Garba Dance was in progress in Gujrati Mohalla, Loco Road the
daughter of Kailash and niece of Sunil, Vijay and Jagdish (since deceased)
Jaanki was also performing Garba dance. The appellant had taken exception to
the dancing of Jaanki in Garba dance and started assaulting her. Kailash,
Sunil Vijay and Jagdish had objected to the behaviour of appellant. In a
heated exchange appellant alleged to have taken out knife and hit on the chest
of Kailash through which blood started oozing out. No sooner Amar Gujrati
reached the spot to protect Kailash, the appellant also caused knife injuries to
him on left leg thigh due to which blood started oozing out thereform. Vickky
dragged away Jaanki by beating her. While Jagdish (the deceased) came out
of the house to protect her the appellant is alleged to have caused knife injury
on the chest of and left shoulder of the deceased, as a result the deceased
died on the spot. On the aforesaid allegation the FIR was lodged. Upon
collection of the evidence and recording of the statement of witnesss challan
was filed. The Sessions Court on appreciation of evidence placed on record
convicted and sentenced the present appellant.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the impugned
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. Even if the story of
prosecution accepted on its face value the allegations made against the
appellant at the most could be a case of 304 Part II of IPC and not of the
offence under section 302 of IPC. It is further submitted that present appellant
has so far undergone incarceration of 7 years. It is further submitted that the
appeal being of 2021 is not likely to be decided in the near future. On these
grounds, learned counsel submits that the present appellant may be extended
the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that
appellant not only caused homicidal death of the deceased Jagdish but also
injured two persons namely Kailash and Amar and also had assaulted brutally
Jaanki, therefore, there was an element of mens rea involved while he inflicted
knife injury on the chest of the deceased Jagdish resulting into the homicidal
death. No exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and
grant of bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found
proved against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, but regard being had to the fact present appellant so far has undergone
incarceration of 7 years and the appeal is of the year 2021 and there is no
likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, in the obtaining facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that benefit of
suspension of sentence may be extended to present appellant.
Accordingly, IA No.20188 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of present appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of
the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to verification of the
factum of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
Appellant - Vikki Gujrati @ Bhola directed to appear before the Registry
of this Court first on 24/01/2024 and on other subsequent dates as may be
fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, the said I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
Pawar
