Madhya Pradesh High Court
Virendra Kumar Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 January, 2023
Author: Sunita Yadav
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 9863 of 2022
(VIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 05-01-2023
Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant no.3.
Shri Dheeraj Budholiya, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.
Heard on I.A. No.19633/2022, second application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant No.3-Raj Kishori Bai
Shivhare.
This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 27/10/2022
passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Joura, District Morena in S.T.
No.310/2012, whereby the appellant no.3-Kishori Bai Shivhare had been
convicted under Section 420/120-B of IPC sentenced her to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for Five years with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, under Section 465/120-B
of IPC sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for One year with fine
of Rs. 1,000/- each, under Section 466/120- B of IPC sentenced her to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for Five years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section
468/120-B of IPC sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for Five
years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- & under Section 471/120- B of IPC sentenced her
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for Five years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- with
default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant no.3 submits that the trial Court has
wrongly convicted the appellant no.3 without proper appreciation of facts of the
case. After dismissal of first application for suspension of sentence, the
appellant no.3 has suffered further two months of incarceration. It is further
argued that the appellant no.3 is a 65 year old lady who may not be able to bear
the rigours of incarceration. Her husband is also suffering from heart disease
and there is no-one in her family to look after him. There are lots of
contradictions and omissions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses.
Final hearing of this appeal will take long time, therefore, he prays to suspend
the jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant no.3.
Counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for
its rejection.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available
on record.
Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties,
without commenting on merits of the case, IA No.19633 of 2022 is hereby
allowed. Subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on
furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with
two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned
trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant no.3 shall remain
suspended and she be released on bail.
The appellant no.3 is further directed to mark her appearance before the
Office of this Court on 13/03/2023 and on subsequent dates given by the
Office in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for
compliance.
Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
vpn
VIPIN KUMAR
AGRAHARI
2023.01.06
10:22:57
+05'30'
