Saligram Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 1608 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                       CRA No. 8776 of 2022
                                            (SALIGRAM GURJAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 30-01-2023
                                 Shri Ashok Kumar Jain - Advocate for the appellant.

                                 Smt. Anjali Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

I.A.No.15280/2022, an application moved on behalf of the appellant under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing present appeal, is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein

and the delay occurred in filing this appeal is condoned.

Heard on I.A. No. 15344/2022, first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant- Saligaram Gurjar. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 30/05/2017 passed by Special Judge (M.P.D.V.P.K. Act), Shivpuri in Special Session Case No.400047/2009, whereby appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 364(A) of IPC and Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act and sentenced to undergo Life imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-.

Four accused persons namely; Jagdish, Harkhanth, Harnam and

Saligaram were convicted out of which three persons namely Jagdish, Harkhanth and Harnam had filed criminal appeal No.233/2010, 239/2010 and 281/2010 respectively. The said appeals have been decided by this Court on 09/11/2021 and all the three appellants had been acquitted. The present appellant- Saligaram could not filed the appeal on time due to financial indegency but continuously, he has been undergoing jail sentence since 07/05/2011. Now, he has filed an appeal against the conviction. As such, appellant has suffered jail incarceration of 11 years and 5 months. Signature Not Verified Signed by: MONIKA SHARMA Signing time: 31-01-2023 04:48:49 PM

Shri Ashok Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the appellant submits that as the matter of fact, the appeal itself deserves to be allowed in the light of the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench based on critical evaluation of the evidence on record in the aforesaid criminal appeals in respect of Jagdish, Harkhanth and Harnam. It is submitted that the judgment rendered by the Sessions Court is polluted with illegality on many counts. Relevant piece of evidence has not been considered. The judgment is based on surmises and conjunctures. The alleged charge of abduction has wrongly been found proved beyond reasonable doubt despite no evidence. Even otherwise, appellant has already been sufferred jail incarceration since 07/05/2011. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that

execution of the jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, Ms. Anjali Gyanani, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the application and supported the impugned judgment with the submission that the case of the appellant is distinguishable from that of the other accused persons who stand acquitted by the aforesaid judgment in inasmuch as appellant was identified in TIP and was named by the abductee in his ocular evidence. Hence, no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence to the appellant.

In rejoinder, Shri Jain submits that even the factum of TIP and that ocular evidence of abductee have also been threadbare considered by the appellate Court while acquitting the other similar situated accused person.

Be that it may be, learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting upon rival contentions, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, we deem it proper to suspend the sentence of the appellant till disposal of the

Signature Not Verified appeal. Accordingly, application is allowed and it is directed that execution Signed by: MONIKA SHARMA Signing time: 31-01-2023 04:48:49 PM

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 bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one local solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and also subject to verification of the fact regarding deposit of the fine amount for his appearance before the Registry of this Court first on 23/03/2023, 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) On violation of the conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No.15344/2022 stands allowed and disposed of. List for final hearing in the month of March, 2023. Certified copy as per rules.

                              (ROHIT ARYA)                                  (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
                                 JUDGE                                               JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MONIKA
SHARMA
Signing time: 31-01-2023
04:48:49 PM

                           Monika




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MONIKA
SHARMA
Signing time: 31-01-2023
04:48:49 PM