Sonu Lodha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 1354 MP

                                     1
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           AT GWALIOR
                              CRA No. 1853 of 2018
                (SONU LODHA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 23-01-2023
         Shri Rajmani Bansal, learned counsel for the appellants.

         Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General for the
respondent-State.

Heard on I.A. No. 14098/2022, which is third application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant No.3 Smt. Guddi Bai.

Appellant No.3 stands convicted under Section 304-B and 498-A of IPC

and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer additional imprisonment for two years and three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer additional imprisonment for one year respectively, vide judgment dated 21/02/2018 passed by II Sessions Judge, Guna District Guna (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 39/2017.

As per prosecution story, deceased Dhappo Bai was married to complainant Sonu and present appellant is mother of the complainant Sonu who lodged a complaint on 08/12/2016 that on fateful day he had left the

house for work at 9.30 am. When he came back, his mother appellant/Guddi Bai informed him that deceased Dhappo Bai has died hanging noose. Accordingly, complaint was lodged. On such information, merg intimation was registered at No. 110/2016 under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C. Thereafter, upon collection of oral and documentary evidence and other material placed on record, Challan was filed. The case was committed for sessions Trial and case was committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court on consideration of

evidence placed on record has convicted the appellant along with other co- accused persons and sentenced as aforesaid.

Learned counsel for appellant No.3 submits that appellant No.3 so far as undergone 5 years of sentence. There is no direct evidence much less circumstantial evidence which could lead to the conclusion drawn by the Sessions court in the matter of conviction. The judgment as such suffers from perversity of approach and based on surmises and conjectures. The evidence on record suffers from inherent contradictions and omissions. Even otherwise, appeal is of year 2018. There is no likelihood of early hearing of appeal. Besides, appellant is a lady and has suffered five years jail sentence. Hence,

prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Per contra, State counsel opposes the application supporting the order impugned. It is submitted that besides the fact regarding unreasonable dowry demands, there has been constant embarrassment and harassment of the deceased, as has come in the occular evidence of (P.W.1) and (P.W.3). There is direct proximity of appellant having caused mental and physical torture to the deceased which lead to unnatural death of the deceased by hanging noose, therefore, no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension and sentence.

Upon hearing counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case but regard being had to the fact that appellant is a lady and no criminal antecedents, she has already been undergone jail sentence for five years and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant No. 3 Smt. Guddi Bai.

Accordingly, it is directed that the jail sentence of the appellant No. 3

Smt. Guddi Bai shall remain suspended and she be released on bail on her 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.

Appellant No. 3 is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court on 29.03.2023 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 releasing the appellant, the medical examination of the appellant 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, appellant shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order;

(ii) violation of conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No. 14098/2022 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)                                    (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
       JUDGE                                                 JUDGE

Prachi


  PRACHI MISHRA
  2023.01.24
  10:50:51 +05'30'