Shyam Singh @ Chhotu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 1266 MP

                                                              1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                       CRA No. 1966 of 2022
                                          (SHYAM SINGH @ CHHOTU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 20-01-2023
                                 Shri M.I.Khan, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                 Shri     Bhaskar    Agrawal,      learned    Govt.    Advocate   for   the
                           respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Admit.

Also heard on I.A. No.15001/2022, first application filed under section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C.,1973 for suspension of jail sentence on behalf of appellant - Shyam Singh @ Chhotu.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 302 or 302/34, 201 and 404 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/-, RI for 7 years with fine of Rs.5000/- and RI for 02 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation by judgment dated 09.12.2021 passed by the court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jaora, Distt. Ratlam

in ST No.114/2014.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no eye witnesses in the case and entire prosecution case is depends on circumstantial evidence. Last seen theory is not established against the appellant because Manisha (PW-5) in para 6 of cross-examination, has admitted that she has not seen the accused persons on the date of incident. Varsha (PW-9) has also not supported the case of prosecution. Seizure of purse from the appellant, is also not proved and as per statements of father Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 20-01-2023 18:04:00

of deceased - Balaram (PW-3), identification of purse is not established. Hence, the chain of circumstances are not complete against the appellant. Learned counsel further submits that appellant was in custody from 13.05.2013 to 07.10.2013 and is in custody since the date of judgment. This appeal will not come for early hearing in near future. Hence, under these circumstances, counsel prays for suspension of jail sentence to the appellant.

Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State opposes the prayer.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and also

considering the evidence available on record against the appellant, we are of the opinion that the jail sentence of the appellant deserves to be suspended.

Accordingly, I.A. No.15001/2022 is allowed and the execution of jail sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended and it is ordered that the appellant be released on bail subject to depositing fine amount, if already not deposited, and on his furnishing a personal bond of sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the Registry of this Court on 15.03.2023 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

List this matter for final hearing in due course. I.A. No.15001/2022 is, accordingly, disposed of. Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI Signing time: 20-01-2023 18:04:00

Certified copy as per rules.

                              (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)               (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
                                       JUDGE                               JUDGE

                           Vibha




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIBHA PACHORI
Signing time: 20-01-2023
18:04:00