Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pankaj Maheshwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2023
Author: Sanjay Dwivedi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4113 of 2017
(PANKAJ MAHESHWARI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 14-02-2023
Smt. Smita Verma - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri L.A.S. Baghel - Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
H e a r d on I.A. Nos.20504/2022 and 20509/2022 which are the
applications filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on
behalf of the appellants for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. I.A.
No.20504/2022 is the second application for appellant Nos.2 and 3 whereas
I.A. No.20509/2022 is the first application for appellant No.1.
Vide the impugned judgment dated 18.09.2017 passed by the Special
Judge (Atrocity) Sehore in Special Case No.15/2011, appellant No.1 and 2
namely Pankaj Maheshwari and Mahesh Maheshwari respectively have been
convicted under Sections 120-B read with 302 of the India Penal Code, 3(2)(v)
of the Scheduled Cast and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989
and also under Sections 364, 302 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder
to suffer RI for life with fine of Rs.25,000/-, RI for life with fine of Rs.1,000/-,
RI for ten years with fine of Rs.5,000/-, RI for life with fine of Rs.25,000/- and
RI for two years with fine of Rs.1,000/- respectively with default stipulations
whereas appellant No.3 namely Dilip Maheshwari has been convicted under
Sections 120-B read with 302 of IPC, 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST and also under
Section 364 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to suffer RI for life with fine
of Rs.25,000/-, RI for life with fine of Rs.1,000/- and RI for ten years with fine
of Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulations.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANIL
CHOUDHARY
Signing time: 2/15/2023
2:04:27 PM
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there were total 12
accused persons, out of which, one expired during trial, four have been
acquitted and remaining have been convicted under the aforementioned
offences. She submits that all the accused persons have been awarded sentence
for life. She further submits that out of six appellants, appellant Nos.4, 5 and 6
have already been granted bail. She also submits that the case is based upon
circumstantial evidence and as per the material collected by the prosecution, the
only circumstance which is made basis for implicating the present appellants as
accused was their call details showing that they were continuously taking to
each other and as per the tower location, they were present in the house of Shiv
Shankar who was one of the accused persons. Learned counsel for the
appellants submits that the case of present appellants is similar to that of co-
appellants who have been granted bail by this Court facing similar allegations
and, therefore, she is claiming parity. She submits that appellant No.1 has
almost suffered six years and five months, appellant No.2 has suffered six years
and five months and appellant No.3 has suffered five years and eleven months
in incarceration. She submits that under such circumstances when the case is
based upon circumstantial evidence and except the call details, no other
incriminating evidence is collected by the prosecution indicating that the present
appellants were involved in the alleged crime, the finding given by the trial Court
according to her is unsustainable and the order passed by the trial Court
convicting the appellants will not be sustained. She submits that considering that
fact that the appeal would take time to be heard finally and also the other co-
appellants have already been released on bail, the applications for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to the appellants may also be considered.
Signature Not Verified
On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the State has opposed the
Signed by: ANIL
CHOUDHARY
Signing time: 2/15/2023
2:04:27 PM
submission made by the counsel for the appellants and submitted that the case
of the present appellants is not similar to that of co-appellants who have been
released on bail for the reason that the family members of the deceased have
stated in the Court that just before committing the alleged crime, these
appellants had visited their house and given threat to them and therefore, their
case is not similar.
Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, perusal
of record and the finding given by the trial Court, we are of the opinion that the
case of the present appellants is almost similar to that of co-appellants who
have been released on bail. Therefore, without commencing anything on the
merits of the case, I.A. Nos.20504/2022 and 20509/2022 are allowed.
It is directed that appellant Nos.1, 2 and 3 namely Pankaj Maheshwari,
Mahesh Maheshwari and Dilip Maheshwari respectively shall be released on bail
upon their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees
One Lac) each with a surety bond each of like amount to the satisfaction of
trial Court concerned for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on
14.06.2023 and on such other dates as may be fixed by the Registry in this
regard.
Accordingly, I.A. Nos.20504/2022 and 20509/2022 are allowed.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJAY DWIVEDI) (VISHAL DHAGAT)
JUDGE JUDGE
ac/-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANIL
CHOUDHARY
Signing time: 2/15/2023
2:04:27 PM
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANIL
CHOUDHARY
Signing time: 2/15/2023
2:04:27 PM
