Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rupesh Ravat @ Nandu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2023
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 8311 of 2022
(RAKESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA No. 7471 of 2022
(RUPESH RAVAT @NANDU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA No. 12577 of 2022
([email protected] AJJU & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-02-2023
Shri Javed Khan, learned counsel for the appellant-Rakesh in Cr.A.
No.8311/2022.
Shri Vibhor Khandelwal, learned counsel for the appellant-Rupesh
[email protected] in Cr.A. No.7471/2022.
Shri T.C. Jain, learned counsel for the [email protected] and
[email protected] in Cr.A. No.12577/2022.
Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.16425/2022, which is first application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389 of the
Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant-Rakesh in Cr.A. No.8311/2022.
Also, heard on I.A. No.11651/2022, which is first application
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389 of
the Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant-Rupesh [email protected] in Cr.A.
No.7471/2022.
Also, heard on I.A. No.16936/2022, which is first application
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389 of
the Cr.P.C. on behalf of [email protected] and [email protected] Satpal in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 16-02-2023
19:25:18
Cr.A. No.12577/2022.
The trial Court has convicted each of the appellants under
section 302 read with section 149 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo
Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively with default
stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
30.06.2022 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, District-Dhar in
S.T. No.20/2018.
As per prosecution case, intervening night of 27 and 28
December, 2017 someone assaulted the deceased Jairam. On
28.12.2017 at 9 a.m. it was found that the body of the deceased was
lying in the agriculture field of Raja Seth situated at village Jamanda,
Police Station- Navgaon, District-Dhar. On the basis of the
information supplied by Chokidar Radheshyam, P.W.-1 Dehati Nalsi
Exhibit-P/1 was lodged against unknown persons on the same day i.e.
28.12.2017 at 10:30 a.m. During investigation on 31.12.2017
statement of Durgibai, P.W.-11, who is sister of deceased Jairam, had
been recorded by the police. On the basis of statement of P.W.-11 it
was found that appellants and co-accused persons have assaulted the
deceased and due to the injuries the deceased died.
Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the appellants
have not committed any offence and they have falsely been implicated
in the case. Initial FIR was lodged against the unknown persons.
Thereafter, on 31.12.2017 appellants have been implicated in the case
on the basis of case diary statement of Durgibai, P.W.-11. Further it is
also submitted that Chokidar Radheshayam, P.W.-1, Mangilal ,P.W.-2,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 16-02-2023
19:25:18
brother of the deceased Kailash, P.W.-3 and Jagdish, P.W.-5 had
admitted in their cross examination that on the next day when they had
present at the place where body of the deceased was lying on at that
time Durgibai, P.W.-11 was also present but she did not disclosed the
fact that appellants assaulted the deceased. She was silent after three
days of the incident, therefore, her statement is not reliable. Durgibai,
P.W.-11 in her deposition has not said anything about appellant-
Rupesh. The trial Court has committed error in believing the statement
of the witnesses. Appellant- Rakesh was in custody since 02.01.2018
to 30.04.2019, appellant-Rupesh was in custody since 02.01.2018 to
01.06.2018 , appellants [email protected] Ajju was in custody since 02.01.2018
to 18.06.2018 and appellant- [email protected] Satpal was in custody since
02.01.2018 to 14.06.2018 and 16.11.2021 to 30.06.2022 and
thereafter, all the appellants was in custody from the date of judgment
i.e. 30.06.2022. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near
future therefore, it is prayed that remaining sentence of the appellants
may be suspended and the appellants may be released on bail.
Per Contra, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State has
opposed the prayer of the appellants and submitted that due to threat
given by the appellants Durgibai, P.W.-11 has not disclosed the factum
of the incident before 31.12.2017. FSL report also supports the case of
the prosecution therefore, application for suspension of sentence of the
appellants is liable to be rejected.
We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused
the record.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 16-02-2023
19:25:18
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and also
considering the evidence available against the appellants coupled with
the fact that the final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near
future, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case,
the applications i.e. I.A. No.16425/2022, I.A. No.11651/2022 and I.A.
No.16936/2022 are allowed and jail sentence of the appellants shall
remain suspended.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if
already not deposited, appellants-Rakesh, Rupesh [email protected],
[email protected] and [email protected] shall be released on bail, on
furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) each along with separate sureties in the like amount
to the satisfaction of trial Court, for their appearance before the
Registry of this Court firstly on 27.03.2023, and on such other dates,
as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this
appeal.
I.A. for urgent hearing stands closed.
List all the appeals for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Ajit/-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 16-02-2023
19:25:18
