Sumer Singh Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 287 MP

                                                                1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                        CRA No. 2352 of 2022
                                      (SUMER SINGH RAJPUT AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



                           Dated : 05-01-2023
                                 Shri Vinay Saraf - Senior Advocate with Shri Palash Choudhary and

                           Shri Namit Jain - Advocates for appellants.
                                 Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma - Advocate for objector.
                                 Shri Rahul Solanki - Government Advocate for respondent/state.

Heard on IA No.15010/2022, which are first application for suspension

of sentence on behalf of appellant no.2/ Suresh Singh Rajput S/o Dariyav Singh, appellant no.3/Arjun Singh S/o Suresh Singh Devda and appellant no.10/Arjun Singh S/o Madhav Singh Rajput. The appellant have been convicted and sentenced as under :-

                           Section                      Imprisonment             Fine                   Imprisonment in lieu of

                           147 r/w 149 IPC              1 year RI                Rs.500/-               1 month RI

                           326 r/w 149 IPC (2 counts)   7 year RI (2 counts)     Rs.1000/- (2 counts)   3 month RI (2 counts)

                           307 r/w 149 IPC              10 years RI (2 counts)   Rs.1500/- (2 counts)   4 months RI (2 counts)

                           323 r/w 149 IPC              6 months RI              Rs.200/-               15 days RI

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that identically placed co- convicts appellant nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9 and 11 have already been granted suspension of sentence by order dated 10.11.2022.

It is submitted that there are total 11 appellants. Out of 11, 8 appellants have already been granted suspension of sentence by the said order. The grounds on which the sentence has been suspended in respect of the aforesaid Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 06/01/2023 9:56:02 AM

appellants, those grounds are also available to the present appellants. It is further submitted that the case of the appellants are similar to the case of the appellant Sumer.

It is submitted that there is cross-case on behalf of the present appellants and the learned trial Court has decided and passed the judgments in both the cases on the same day. Dehati Nalishi in the present case was lodged on 05.11.2015 at 8:45 PM at Unique Hospital, Indore and FIR Ex.p/53 was registered on 16.11.2015 at about 1:20 AM, but nothing is mentioned in the FIR regarding Dehati Nalishi. In the cross-case, Dehati Nalishi was lodged on 04.11.2015 at Bombay Hospital, Indore and the FIR was registered on

05.11.2015 at 2:10 AM. It is also submitted that this FIR was registered on the basis of Ex.P/5 Dehati nalishi, which is clearly mentioned in this FIR. It is also submitted that the complainant party of the present case were convicted in cross-case for the offence punishable under Section 302/149 of IPC (two counts), 307, 324 and 148 if IPC and this fact has not been considered earlier. It is also submitted that appellant Sumer Singh has also sustained gun shot injury which is proved by DW/1, DW/2 and DW/3. Both the judgements passed by the learned Court below are contrary to each other and the learned Court below has passed the contrary judgments. Final hearing of the appeal will take sufficient long time, hence, prays for grant of benefit of suspension of jail sentence to the appellants.

In support of his contentions, learned Senior counsel for the appellants has placed reliance over the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kumar vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police (2018 (7) SCC 536) and Laxmi Singh vs. State of Bihar (1976) 4 SCC 394, where the Hon'ble Apex court has observed that at the outset, it would be relevant to Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 06/01/2023 9:56:02 AM

note the settled principles of law on this aspect. Generally failure of the prosecution to offer any explanation in that regard shows that evidence of the prosecution witnesses relating to the incident is not true or at any rate not wholly true.Thus, the prosecution has failed to explain the injuries sustained by the appellants.

Learned counsel for the State and objector submitted that the case of the appellants are not identical to the case of those appellants whose sentence has been suspended by order dated 10.11.2022. It is submitted that this appellants were carrying weapon which has been seized from their possession. The injuries sustained by Dashrath, Ranjeet and Baluji are grievous and dangerous to life.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The grounds on which the other appellants have been granted bail is that the prosecution has failed to explain the injuries sustained by the appellants and two persons died from the appellants side. They have been granted suspension of sentence after taking into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kumar and Laxmi Singh (supra), which are applicable to the case of the appellants. Further, the case of the appellants are identical to the case of the appellant Sumer whose sentence has been suspended by the same order.

Accordingly, IA No.15010/2022 filed by the appellant no.2/ Suresh Singh Rajput S/o Dariyav Singh, appellant no.3/Arjun Singh S/o Suresh Singh Devda

and appellant no.10/Arjun Singh S/o Madhav Singh Rajput is allowed and it is directed that subject to deposit fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by appellants in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for their regular appearance before the Registry of this Court, the

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 06/01/2023 9:56:02 AM

execution of custodial part of the remaining sentence imposed against the appellants shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

The appellants namely appellant no.2/ Suresh Singh Rajput S/o Dariyav Singh, appellant no.3/Arjun Singh S/o Suresh Singh Devda and appellant no.10/Arjun Singh S/o Madhav Singh Rajput after being enlarged on bail, shall mark their presence before the Registry of this Court on 05.04.2023 and on all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by the concerned trial Court.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

Sourabh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 06/01/2023 9:56:02 AM