Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 February, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 3415 of 2022
(MANOJ AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 03-02-2023
Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Siraz Quereshi, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Heard on I.A. No. 1427/2023, an application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.1-Manoj.
Appellant No.1 stands convicted under Section 307/34 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and under
Section 456 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 03 years' RI with fine of
Rs.5,000/- with default stipulations respectively vide judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 08/02/2022 passed by IInd Additional Sessions
Judge, Dabra, District-Gwalior in Sessions Case No.48/2021.
Appellant No.1-Manoj so far has undergone incarceration for 01 year and
03 months.
As per prosecution story, appellant No.1 alongwith co-accused persons
namely Ramsewak and Prakash went to the house of the complainant to enquire
about Kallu Ahirwar, who was the person living there and looking after her
children. Having been not satisfied by the reply, they entered the house of the
complainant and with an intention to kill, co-accused Ramsewak and Prakash
allegedly poured Kerosene on the body of the complainant and set her ablaze.
Against present appellant No.1, it is alleged that he has manhandled the
complainant. On such allegations, FIR was lodged. On completion of
investigation, Challan was filed and the case was committed to the Sessions
Court. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed
before it, has convicted the appellant No.1 and sentenced as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant No.1 at the first instance submits that
earlier on 14/07/2022, this Court while appreciating the evidence on record
though declined to suspend the sentence, but has granted liberty to revive the
prayer after six months. While criticizing the impugned judgment, learned
counsel submits that there is material contradictions in the FIR, statement of
complainant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., and statement recorded
before the Tehsildar (Ex.D-3, D-4 and D-5) inasmuch as, in the FIR, she has
never alleged that present appellant No.1 caught hold of her hand and thereafter,
other co-accused persons poured Kerosene and set her ablaze, whereas, in her
statement recorded before the Court, she has improved her version stating that
present appellant No.1 has caught hold of her hand and thereafter, other co-
accused persons poured Kerosene on her. That apart, appellant No.1 has no
criminal antecedent and in the light of the liberty granted by this Court on
14/07/2022, prayer is made for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on
behalf of appellant No.1-Manoj.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/ State opposed the
application with the submission that the trial Court in paragraph-15 of the
impugned judgment has dealt with the complicity of present appellant No.1 in
the alleged crime. Hence, no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contention touching merits of the case but
regard being had to the fact that appellant No.1 has already suffered 01 year
and 03 months' incarceration and in view of the liberty granted on 14/07/2022,
appellant No.1- Manoj is held entitled for suspension of sentence.
Consequently, I.A. No. 1427/2023 is hereby allowed and it is directed that the
jail sentence of the appellant No.1 shall remain suspended and he be released on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees
Two Lacs Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court. The appellant No.1 is directed to mark his appearance before
the Registry of this Court first on 05/04/2023 and on other subsequent dates as
may be fixed in this behalf with following further conditions:-
(i) Appellant No.1 will abide by the terms and conditions of various
circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and the State
Government as well as the local administration from to time in the matter of
maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene, etc., to avoid
proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-19);
(ii) The concerned Jail Authorities are directed that before releasing
appellant No.1, his medical examination be conducted through the jail doctor
and if it is prima facie found that he is having any symptoms of COVID-19,
then the consequential follow up action including the isolation/quarantine or any
further test required be undertaken immediately.
(iii) On violation of the conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation
of bail.
Accordingly, the I.A. 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
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2023.02.04
13:34:00 +05'30'
