Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rambabu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1491 of 2023
(RAMBABU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 14-02-2023
Shri Deependra Singh Raghuwanshi, learned counsel for appellants.
Shri C.P.Singh, learned counsel for the respondent- State.
Heard on admission.
Record of the trial Court has already been received.
Appeal appears to be arguable, is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No. 3423 of 2023, which is the first application under
Section 389(1) of CrPC filed on behalf of appellant No.1 Rambabu and
appellant No.2-Suresh for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 07-10-2013, complainant Firoz
lodged a dehati nalishi at concerned police station stating therein that on 03-10-
2013 he was going to Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh by transporting a dead body in
the ambulance bearing registration No.MP 07 AH 997 after completion of
postmortem from Bhagwati Hospital, Bombay from where he went to one Vijay
Gayakwad. On 06-10-2013 after leaving the dead body, he took his neighbour
Iqbal Khan who was living at Fatehpur. At around 06:00 pm, while returning
from Gorakhpur around 01:00 pm when he reached near Neemdanda of
Highway Road, the ambulance became punctured and when he kept the tyre at
the back of the vehicle after changing, four miscreants aged around between 20-
22 years having country-made katta and lathi stopped him. One of miscreants
threatened him to stop the vehicle, otherwise he will be killed by fire. Other
three miscreants on the point of katta, looted his titan wrist watch, fare of
Rs.30,000/- regarding ambulance from the pant of Vijay Gayakwad along with
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: YOGENDRA
OJHA
Signing time: 14-02-2023
05:16:19 PM
voter ID, PAN card, driving licence and local wrist watch of Ibban Khan total
amounting to Rs.32,000/- by inflicting lathi injuries on Vijay Gayakwad. It is
alleged that due to light of torch, he had seen the face of miscreants at the time
of incident. On the basis of such dehat nalishi, offence under Sections 394 of
IPC and under Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act was registered vide Crime No.
337 of 2013 at Police Station Dehat, District Shivpuri. Matter was investigated.
Spot map was prepared. During investigation, on the basis of memorandum of
the accused persons, from their possession,the looted articles were seized and
they were arrested. After completion of investigation and other formalities,
charge sheet was filed before the competent court from where the case was
committed to the Special Court for its trial. After conclusion of trial, the learned
trial Court on the basis of material available on record, found the appellants
guilty for offence under Section 394 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment of five years with fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation.
It is submitted by counsel for the appellant that the appellant has falsely
been implicated in the case. There is some contradiction and omission in the
evidence of prosecution witnesses. As per the evidence of eyewitness, namely,
Ibban Khan (PW7), he could not identify the miscreants at the time of alleged
incident. Prosecution witness PW12 Pappu Gurjar and Pran Singh (PW13)
also did not support the prosecution version. The learned trial Court has
wrongly convicted the appellants for the alleged offence. The appellant No. 1
Rambabu was remained in custody for 118 days and appellant was remained in
custody for 292 days during trial. They were on bail during trial and did not
misuse the liberty so granted to them. Fine amount has already been deposited
by the appellants. The appellants are in custody since the date of passing of
impugned judgment i.e. 22.11.2022. Appellant-Lakhan has been extended
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: YOGENDRA
OJHA
Signing time: 14-02-2023
05:16:19 PM
benefit of suspension of sentence by this Court in connected criminal appeal
No.1080/2023. Final disposal of appeal will take some time. Hence, prayed for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
On the other hand, the application is opposed by State Counsel and
prayed for dismissal of application.
Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the fact that the appellant No.1 and 2 have already suffered near
about 118 days and 292 days of jail sentence and during trial, they were on bail
and did not misuse the liberty so granted to them and there is no likelihood of
early disposal of the appeal in near future, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
appellant by way of suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
IA is allowed and it is directed that that the jail sentence of the appellants will
remain under suspension subject to verification that the amount of fine has been
deposited, on the appellants' furnishing cash surety of Rs.5,000/- each along
with a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five
thousand only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of trial Court concerned for appearance of appellants before the
concerned trial Court first on 17th July, 2023 and on such further dates as
may be fixed by the Office in this regard during pendency of this appeal. In
case of failure of furnishing cash surety of aforesaid amount, this order shall
automatically stand lose its effect without reference to the Court.
Accordingly, IA stands disposed of.
CC as per rules.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: YOGENDRA
OJHA
Signing time: 14-02-2023
05:16:19 PM
JUDGE
ojha
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: YOGENDRA
OJHA
Signing time: 14-02-2023
05:16:19 PM
