Sanjay @ Sanju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2883 MP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2883 MP
Judgement Date : 16 February, 2023

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sanjay @ Sanju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 February, 2023

Author: Rohit Arya

                                      1
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            AT GWALIOR
                               CRA No. 179 of 2015
               (SANJAY @ SANJU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 16-02-2023
      Shri Sanjay Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant No.2.

      Shri Rajesh Shukla, Dy. A.G. for the respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.1700/2022, which is the third repeat application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellant No.2 Pradeep Ahirwar.

Appellant No.2 Pradeep Ahirwar stood convicted under Sections 302/34

and 450 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.25,000/- and imprisonment for five years with a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations vide judgment o f conviction and order of sentence dated 24.01.2015 by Additional Sessions Ganjbasoda, District Vidisha (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.244/2013.

Appellant No.2-Pradeep Ahirwar so far has undergone incarceration for 09 year and 10 months.

A s per prosecution story, the co-accused Sanju is married to Leela, daughter of deceased Gopal. Owing to ill-treatment and mental torture she was

brought back to her parents place by her brother-in-law Heeralal and deceased father Gopal. The present appellant is the brother of Sanju. On the fateful day i.e. on 1.4.2013 at about 12.10 in the night the present appellant, brother of Sanju and his father Phool Singh with Sanju went on motorcycle to the house of the deceased. There they picked up quarrel with the deceased for the reason that Leela was not sent back to her in-laws place. Thereafter, deceased Gopal was brutally beaten up causing injuries on various parts of his body, particularly

on head and stomach with sword and Katar. The injuries so caused resulted into his homicidal death. Upon completion of the investigation, challan was filed. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record has convicted and sentenced the appellant and other accused persons as referred above.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that the story as projected in the prosecution is not factually correct. Referring to the cross-examination of the eyewitnesses namely Leela Ahirwar (PW/1), Harikrishan (PW/3), Heeralal (PW/4) Chironjilal (PW/5), he submits that appellant with Sanju and Phool Singh had gone to pay condolence due to bereavement in the family and not

for the reason as alleged in the FIR. In fact, the appellant and other co-accused persons also suffered injuries because of the altercation between two sides. Neither there was any intention nor pre-mediation of mind for causing injuries. It was in fact a free fight. There is no specific overt act attributed to any of the accused persons. This Court on 09.12.2016 has enlarged on bail Phool Singh by suspending his sentence. The case of the appellant is similar to that of Phool Singh. The appellant has already suffered jail incarceration of 09 years and 10 months. The appeal is of the year 2015 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future. Hence, learned counsel for appellant prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.2 Pradeep Ahirwar.

Per contra, learned Dy. A.G. appearing on behalf of the State while supporting the impugned judgment submits that the prosecution case has been found proved with cogent evidence placed on record, hence no exception can be taken thereto in the matter of suspension of sentence. However, he fairly submits that the appellant so far has undergone 9 years and 10 months of jail incarceration.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case, regard being had to the fact that present appellant has undergone incarceration of 9 years and 10 months, co-accused Phool Singh since has been extended the benefit of bail vide order dated 09.12.2016, we are of the view that appellant No.2 Pradeep Ahirwar at this stage is entitled for suspension of sentence.

Consequently, I.A.No.1700 of 2022 is hereby allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant No.2 Pradeep Ahirwar shall remain suspended during pendency of present appeal 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 in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant No.2-Pradeep Ahirwar is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 28.04.2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with following further conditions:-

( i) the concerned jail authorities are directed that before releas ing appellant No.2, 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 or any further test required be undertaken immediately. If not, present appellant shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order ;