Madhya Pradesh High Court
Saroj Kahar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 December, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 5778 of 2023
(SAROJ KAHAR Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-12-2023
Shri Arvind Pathak - Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Pushpanjali Dwivedi - Panel Lawyer for State.
Reserved on : 21.12.2023
Pronounced on : 22.12.2023
Arguments of counsel for the parties are heard at length.
Judgment and record of the Court below perused.
ORDER
Heard on the question of admission.
The appeal being arguable is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A.No.10539/2023, which is first application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant Saroj Kahar.
The appellant has been convicted for offences punishable under Sections
304, 417, 120-B and 317 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years,
R.I. for 1 year, R.I. for 10 years and R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-,
Rs.500/-, Rs.5,000/- and Rs.2,000/- respectively, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent
and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He also submits that the trial Court
has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on
record and committed error in convicting the appellant for aforesaid offence.
The appellant is in custody and appeal would take considerable time to
conclude. She is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the
directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is
prayed that the application for suspension of sentence may be considered.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the
application and prayed for its rejection.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This application for suspension of sentence has been argued on the
ground that the applicant was not involved in the commission of offence for
which she was held guilty.
It has been argued that the applicant was mother of the child who was
kidnapped and was taken away from her custody but the case was registered
against the applicant for abandoning the child and this was the reason that
applicant could not lodge the FIR about the kidnapping of her child.
In the light of these contentions, the record of trial court has been
perused.
From the evidence it is established that applicant obtained the discharge
of child from the hospital at 1:00 p.m. and left the hospital. Few hours later, the
child was found abandoned and was brought back to the hospital at 4:00 p.m.
on the same date. The child later died during treatment. There is CCTV footage
showing the applicant leaving along with other persons and the child at around
1:40 p.m. on that date. The applicant was arrested at 8:00 p.m. on the date of
incident and if she was deprived of the custody of child or her child was
kidnapped from the hospital, she had plenty of time to report the matter to the
police and hospital authorities. Her silence establishes the fact that she had
criminal motives and is raising a false claim here. She has failed to raise the plea
of kidnapping even before the trial court.
The application for suspension of sentence is accordingly dismissed.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
ps
Date: 2023.12.22 19:56:14 +05'30'
