Madhya Pradesh High Court
Beenalal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 December, 2023
Author: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
Bench: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 7711 of 2022
(BEENALAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 20-12-2023
Shri H.K.Qureshi - Advocate for appellant.
Shri D.P.Patel - Dy.Govt.Advocate for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.27395/2023 this is fourth application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of
appellant. Earlier bail applications was dismissed as withdrawn.
The appellant has been convicted vide judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed
by Session Judge, Harda in S.T. No. 101/2018 and appellant has been
convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and under Sections
4 of Explosive Substances Act and Section 286 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo RI for 5 years, 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- and Rs.1,000/- for
each offence respectively with usual default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not
properly appreciated the evidence in its proper perspective and committed
grave error in convicting the appellant for aforesaid offence. The appellant is in
jail from the date of impugned judgement and learned counsel for appellant
assures that in future the appellant will not indulge himself in any offence. There
are fair chances of success of this appeal and final hearing of same will take
considerable time, therefore, if remaining custodial sentence has not been
suspended, then the appeal filed by appellant may turn infructuous. Under these
circumstances, learned counsel for appellant prays for suspension of jail
sentence and release of the appellant on bail till the final disposal of the appeal.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State for opposed the
application.
Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case coupled
with the assurance given by learned counsel for appellant and according to
listing policy the hearing of this appeal will take time, the application is allowed
and it is directed that the execution of the remaining jail sentence passed against
appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal subject to
depositing entire fine amount, if already not deposited and upon his furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lacs only) with two
solvent sureties each in the like amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) to
the satisfaction of the trial Court for securing his presence before the trial Court
on 15/02/2024 and on such further dates as may be fixed by trial Court it in this
regard during the pendency of this appeal. It is made clear that after release
from the jail, appellant shall not indulge himself in any offence, failing which this
order shall come to an end and trial Court is at liberty to take appropriate steps
for securing presence of appellant for serving out remain jail sentence.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
(ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY)
JUDGE
sm
