Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramshankar Pachaar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 December, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 3770 of 2016
(RAMSHANKAR PACHAAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-12-2023
Ms. Smita Varma - Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.19445/2019, an application under Section 389 of the
Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.1 Ram
Shankar Pachaar arising out of judgment dated 22.11.2016 delivered in S.T.
No.249/2013 passed by Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad.
The appellant No.1 has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 147 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.
1000/-, Section 148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with fine
of Rs. 1000/-, Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for life with
fine of Rs. 2000/-, Section 302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for life
with fine of Rs. 2000/-, Section 307/149 of IPC and sentenced to RI for 10
years with fine of Rs. 1000/- and Section 25/27 of Arms Act and sentenced to
undergo RI for 2 years with fine of Rs, 2000/- with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant No. 1 submits that as per the
prosecution story, appellant caused gun shot injury to Ganesh Moral
(deceased) whereas co-accused Ashok Choyal caused gun shot injury to
Ramshankar Jat (deceased). Considering the period of custody, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Cr.A. No. 3061/2023 suspended the remaining jail sentence
of Ashok Choyal. The appellant is almost similarly situated. In additional, it is
argued that no weapon/firearm is recovered from the appellant. The statement
of Vipin Kumar Verma ( DW-2) a Forest Officer is highly relied upon to
contend that on the same day of incident and at the same time this appellant
was in the custody of Forest Department. The Court below has committed an
error in disbelieving it on the ground that the Forest Officers conducted seizure
at around 1:45 whereas present incident had taken place at around 4:30 pm.
Learned counsel for the appellant No. 1 submits that para 5 of the statement of
Vipin Kumar Verma (DW-2) escaped notice of Court below wherein the Forest
Officer categorically deposed that this appellant remained in custody on the said
date till 6 pm in the evening. The final hearing of this appeal is not possible in
near future. Thus, remaining jail sentence of this appellant No.1 may be
suspended.
Learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer on the basis of
objection.
Considering the aforesaid, period of custody and order of Supreme
Court in the case of Ashok Choyal (supra), we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant No.1.
Accordingly, I.A. No.19445/2019 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed
that appellant No.1 Ramshankar Pachaar be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the trial Court,
Hoshangabad on 11.01.2024 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by
the trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Digitally L.R.
signed by LALIT
SINGH RANA
Date: 2023.12.12
13:58:52 +05'30'
