Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hari Singh @ Heera vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 December, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 9565 of 2019
(HARI SINGH @ HEERA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 08-12-2023
Shri Ashish Singh Jadoun - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Kaushlendra Singh Tomar - Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-State.
Heard on I.A.No. 4676/2023, third repeat application filed on
behalf of appellant No.3 - Dhanram alias Naina under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Present appellant stands convicted for offence under Section 148
of IPC and sentenced to undergo 02 years' RI with fine of Rs.500/-,
Section 302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo LI with fine of
Rs.2000/- and Section 460/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years'
RI with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulations respectively vide
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12-10-2019 passed by
IV Additional Sessions Judge, Guna in Sessions Case No.100108/2015.
Appellant No.3 so far has alread undergone 04 years and 05 months
incarceration.
Prosecution story as found proved is that on 23-02-2015,
complainant Roopa Banjara in injured condition orally made a complaint
at police station Umari Thana to the effect that at about 09 in the night he
alongwith Dhena @ Bhura Banjara was sitting in the court-yard inside the
house. At that time, Naval Banjara weilding farsi, Hari Banjara having
lathi, Jesa Banjara weilding lohangi and Dhanram Banjara (present
appellant) having lathi came inside the house and because of rivalry
pertaining to election of Panchayat hurled abuses. When they were
restricted to do so, Naval Banjara inflicted farsi blow on his head due to
which blood started oozing out. Hari Banjara inflicted lathi blow due to
which he sustained contusions. Daulat Banjara was assaulted by Jesa
Banjara by means of lohangi which hit on the finger of his left hand.
Thereafter, present appellant Dhanram Banajara inflicted lathi blow to
Dhena @ Bhura which caused injuries on his back and other parts of the
body and as a result of which he sustained swelling. When all screamed,
Chatra Banjara came to rescue, on which Mulla Banjara assaulted him by
kicks and fists. Having heard screams, persons of the vicinity arrived at
the scene of occurance whereafter the accused persons while hurling
abuses fled away by threatening them for dire consequences. On the basis
of such oral report, initially, the case was registered at Crime No.03/2015
under Section 452, 324, 323, 294, 506-B and 34 of IPC, by Police Chowki
Umari which was then sent to police station Myana where the actual Crime
bearing No.44/2015 under Sections 452, 324, 323, 294, 506-B and 34 of
IPC was registered and the investigation was triggered. Thereafter, during
the course of treatment, complainant Roopa Banjara died and therefore, an
offence under Section 302 of IPC was enhanced. After completion of
investigation including collection of the incriminating material and
recording statements of witnesses challan was filed. The case was
committed for Sessions Trial. The trial Court upon evaluation of evidence
placed on record has concluded to convict present appellant along with
other co-accused persons for the offences as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant No.3 while taking exception to the
impugned judgment submits that allegation against present appellant
Dhanram Banajara is of inflicting lathi blow to Dhena @ Bhura which
caused injuries on his back and other parts of the body and as a result of
which he sustained swelling. There is no specific allegation against the
present appellant to cause injury to Roopa Banjara (deceased) by any hard
and blunt weapon resulting into his death. Case of present appellant is
distinguishable from other accused persons against whom, allegations of
causing injuries by means of farsi, lohangi are found proved. Besides,
appellant No.3 so far has suffered incarceration of 04 years and 05
months. That apart, similarly placed co-accused/appellant No.5-Mulla alias
Bhanwar Singh, under similar facts and circumstances, has already been
extended benefit of suspension of sentence by this Court vide order dated
1/12/2023. He seeks parity in treatment with appellant No.5. It is further
submitted that instant appeal is of the year 2019 and there is no likelihood
of early hearing of the appeal in the near future. Hence, learned counsel
prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant.
P e r contra, learned counsel for the respondent - State while
supporting the impugned judgment contends that looking to the gravity of
the offence, no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, without commenting
on merits of the case, regard being had to the fact that appellant No.3 -
Dhanram alias Naina so far has already suffered actual jail sentence of 4
years and 5 months and that benefit of suspension of sentence has already
been extended by this Court vid e order dated 1/12/2023 to similarly
placed co-accused/appellant No.5-Mulla a lia s Bhanwar Singh under
similar facts and circumstances coupled with the fact that the appeal is
pending since 2019 and is not likely to be decided in the near future, in the
obtaining facts and circumstances, we are of the view that present
appellant is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.4676 of 2023 stands allowed and it is
directed that the jail sentence of appellant No.3 - Dhanram alias Naina
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 concerned.
Appellant No.3-Dhanram alias Naina is directed to appear before
the Registry of this Court first on 20/02/2024 and thereafter, on other
subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, the said IA 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
SUNEEL
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
GWALIOR,
2.5.4.20=157244b0239a6fd662b29b00a11f
DUBEY
c66a5e160f585aa7a92425f380d476b32818,
postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
serialNumber=4009CAE962958E019ADDF0
4E87EFD5C07FA5D0C38532D550F61B5540
1A275B8C, cn=SUNEEL DUBEY
Date: 2023.12.11 11:20:48 -08'00'
(Dubey)
