Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yogesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 February, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 231 of 2020
(YOGESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 17-02-2023
Shri Manoj Saxena,, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Mohammad Ibrahim, learned G.A. for the respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.13186/2022, which is first application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of
the appellant - Yogesh.
This appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment
dated 24.12.2019 passed by Learned First Additional Sessions Judge,
Byaawra, District Rajgarh in Sessions Trial No.207/2018 whereby the appellant
has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- and Section 323 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo 1 year's R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default
stipulation.
As per prosecution story, this appellant was married with Sanju bai who
was brought to the hospital in 95% burnt condition on 16.05.2018. Her dying
declaration was recorded by the Executing Magistrate in which she has
disclosed that her husband was talking on mobile phone due to which a dispute
arose and his mother Anitabai caught hold her and then this appellant poured
the kerosene oil and set her ablaze.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the doctor recorded her
statement in which she disclosed that accidentally she got burnt due to kerosene
oil. It is further submitted that Sanjubai committed suicide by pouring kerosene
oil on herself immediately after there was a dispute with this appellant. In cross-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 20-02-2023
16:48:18
examination her parents disclosed that she was short tempered and used to fight
on petty issues.
It is further submitted that this appellant is in jail since 2016 and this
appeal is not likely to be heard finally in near future. the jail sentence of Anita bai
has already been suspended.
Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State opposes the aforesaid
prayer and prays for its rejection.
Looking to the period of custody of the appellant and arguable grounds
that there are two dying declarations contrary to each other and the cause of
dispute between the husband and wife, the jail sentence of the appellant is
suspended.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments
advanced by the counsel for the parties, the application (I.A.No.13186/2022) is
allowed.
It is directed that the jail sentence of the appellant - Yogesh shall remain
suspended and he be released on bail upon his depositing the fine amount (if
not already deposited) and also upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of
this Court on 15.06.2023 and on such further dates as may be fixed in this
behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
Accordingly, I.A.No.13186/2022 stands allowed and disposed off.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 20-02-2023
16:48:18
Divyansh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 20-02-2023
16:48:18
