Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hari Singh Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 December, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 14933 of 2023
(HARI SINGH MEENA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-12-2023
Shri Gagan Sharma- Advocate for appellants.
Shri Dinesh Savita- Public Prosecutor for respondent- State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.21994 of 2023, first application under Section
389(1) Cr. P.C. moved on behalf of appellants No.1 to 4, namely, Hari Singh
Meena, Sagar Singh Meena, Randheer Meena and Rameshwar Meena
seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Each of the appellants stood convicted under Section 325/34 of IPC
read with Section 3(2)(v-a) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentenced to undergo two years RI with fine
of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 323/34 of IPC (four counts) read with Section
3(2)(v-a) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, sentenced to undergo six months RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default
stipulations, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08-11-
2023 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Guna in Special Sessions Trial No.
201 of 2018.
Learned Counsel for appellants submits that the impugned judgment
passed by learned trial Court is based on assumption, conjectures and
surmises. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in convicting and
sentencing the present appellants without appreciating the prosecution evidence
properly. There are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of
witnesses. The jail sentence of appellants has been suspended by learned trial
Court till 08-12-2023 under Section 389(3) of the Cr.P.C. and fine amount has
already been deposited by the appellants. There is no likelihood of early hearing
of the appeal in near future. On these premised submissions, learned counsel
prays that the execution of remaining jail sentence of appellants may be
suspended and he may be enlarged o n bail during pendency of the instant
appeal.
Per contra, learned counsel for State opposes the application and prays
for its rejection.
Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties but without commenting
upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that
application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly, directed that the
execution of remaining jail sentence of appellants shall remain suspended during
pendency of this appeal and they shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)
each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of
Trial Court and also subject to deposit of the fine amount (if not already
deposited) for their appearance before the Registry of this Court first on
08.01.2024 and on further dates as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard
till final disposal of the instant appeal.
Accordingly, aforesaid IA stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
MKB
