Dharmendra Kumar vs Central Bureau Of Investigation
2023 Latest Caselaw 1221 MP

                                                            1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                    CRA No. 12564 of 2022
                                       (DHARMENDRA KUMAR Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION)

                          Dated : 20-01-2023
                                Shri Abhishek Parashar-Advocate for the appellant.

                                Shri Ravi Choudhary-Advocate for the respondent/ CBI.

Heard on I.A. No. 20275/2022 which is the first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the sole appellant.

Present appellant stands convicted under Section 120-B, 419 read with

Section 120-B, 420 read with Section 120-B, 467 read with SEction 120B, 468 read with Section 120B, 471 read with Section 120B IPC and under Section 4 of M.P. Recognized Examination Act read with Section 120B IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for three years with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, RI for three years with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, RI for four years with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, RI for four years with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, RI for three years with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, RI for four years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- and RI for one year with a fine of Rs.100/- ,with default stipulations with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.12.2022 passed by

Special Judge, CBI & XII Additional Sessions Judge, District Gwalior (M.P.) in S.C. CBI No.01/2019.

As per prosecution story, the appellant is a solver and had impersonated co-accused Laxman Singh and had appeared in the PCRT Examination conducted in the year 2013. The appellant was arrested during investigation.

Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The learned Trial Judge has not taken into consideration the relevant evidence placed on record. The impugned judgment Signature Not Verified Signed by: PAWAN DHARKAR Signing time: 1/20/2023 6:33:57 PM

is based on presumptions and assumptions. Even otherwise, the appellant has undergone for almost two years six months jail incarceration. Further jail incarceration in the company of hardened criminals shall seriously jeopardize his life and family. He belongs to a poor family. The appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that execution of the jail sentence of appellant may be suspended during pendencey of the present appeal and he may be enlarged on bail.

P er contra, Shri Choudhary, learned counsel for the respondent/CBI opposes the application and supported the impugned judgment with submission

that the appellant had impersonated the co-accused Laxman Singh and had appeared in the PCRT Examination conducted in the year 2013, hence, there is no illegality in the impugned judgment. Therefore, no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, regard being had to the fact that alleged act of impersonification is of the year 2013 and the impugned judgment has been passed in the year 2022 at a distance of more than 9 years. The appellant is a young boy. At this stage, if appellant is made to suffer further jail incarceration then the same will jeopardize his future. The appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future. This Court is of the view that the application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly, directed that execution order of jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees

Signature Not Verified Two Lakhs Only) with two solvent sureties, out of which one should be local, Signed by: PAWAN DHARKAR Signing time: 1/20/2023 6:33:57 PM

in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and also subject to deposit of the fine amount (if not already deposited) for appearance before the Registry of this Court on 16/02/2023, and on further dates as may be directed by the Registry in that regard, with following further conditions:

(i) Appellant will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and the State Government as well as the local administration from to time in the matter of maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene, etc., to avoid proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-19);

(ii) The concerned Jail Authorities are directed that before releasing appellant, 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 including the isolation/quarantine or any further test required be undertaken immediately.

(iii) Appellant shall mark his attendance before the concerned police station on 2nd and 4th Saturday every month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon;

(iv) On violation of the conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly,the I.A. stands allowed and disposed of. Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the

instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.

Certified copy as per rules.

                               (ROHIT ARYA)                                  (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
                                  JUDGE                                               JUDGE

                          pd

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 1/20/2023
6:33:57 PM





Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 1/20/2023
6:33:57 PM