Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj vs State Of M.P. on 6 January, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No.610 of 2021
(MANOJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 06-01-2023
Shri Manohar Singh Chouhan - Advocate for appellant No.5.
Shri Amit Singh Sisodiya - Govt. Advocate for respondent / State.
Shri Mohammad Ikram Ansari - Advocate for objector.
____________________________________________________________
IA.No.14660/2022, which is an application for urgent hearing,
stands disposed off.
Also heard on I.A. No.13589/2022, which is first application u/s.
389 of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of custodial sentence filed on behalf
of appellant No.5 - Munna @ Kalpesh.
The present appeal is filed against the judgment dated 31.12.2020
passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar in S.T. No.142/2015,
whereby out of 10 accused, 6 have been convicted and sentenced. The
present appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under :
Conviction U/s. Imprisonment Fine In default of
Payment of fine.
148 of IPC 1 Year RI - -
302/149 of IPC Life Imprisonment 1000/- 6 months RI
323/149 of IPC Three months - 3 months RI
342 of IPC 3 months RI - -
The prosecution story, in short, is as under :
On 15.10.2014 near about at 10.20 in the night the complainant
Mohan S/o Radheshyam Raghuvanshi along with his friend Ravi was
discussing with Rammu Chowkidar in respect of sale-purchase of land
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 07-01-2023
12:33:27
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No.610 of 2021
(MANOJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
and at that time he received telephone call from Dinesh Raghuvanshi
that an accident took place with Bullet motorcycle at Eicher Square with
another motorcycle belonging to Prem of Sagour. Mohan and Ravi
immediately reached on the spot where they met with Dinesh
Raghuvanshi and Kanha Khati and the Honda motorcycle was also lying
there. Dinesh demanded the cost of damage caused to the motorcycle
from Prem which he denied. Then, the friends of Prem viz. Devi
Pahalwan, Ravi, Mahesh, Munna (present appellant), Manoj Pathariya,
Kanha Bhoi, etc. came there on motorcycle. Due to denial of payment of
expenditure, scuffle took place between all of them, then brother of
Mohan viz. Murli and Anurag came there in Swift Car and tried to
intervene in the matter, then the accused left the place. When Mohan
and his brother Murli, Anurag, Kanha Khati, Dinesh and Ravi were
going to Pithampur Police Station to lodge a report, at that time, Devi
Pahalwan, Munna Maratha, Mahesh Bhoi, Kanha @ Kanhaiyalal, Ravi
Goud, Manoj Pathriya, Prem Rajput, Ramesh Bhoi, Bablu Goud, Golu
Goud came on 4-5 motorcycles overtake them and started abusing them
by filthy language. Thereafter, with a common intention to kill them,
Devi Pahalwan gave a blow by means of sword on the left hand of
Dinesh Raghuvanshi. Dinesh Raghuvanshi tried to run away, then
Bablu, Golu, Ramesh chased him and Bablu assaulted him by means of
sword on his back. When Murli stepped down from the car, accused
Mahesh fired a gun shot on Murli on his left abdomen and he fell down
and bleeding started. When complainant Mohan, Anurag and Ravi ran
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 07-01-2023
12:33:27
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No.610 of 2021
(MANOJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
towards the Police Station, then Munna @ Kalpesh Maratha fired the
gun-shot. They took Murli and Dinesh to Madhya Bharat Hospital
where Murli died. The FIR was registered at Police Station Pithampur at
Crime No. 687/2014 for the offences u/s. 147, 148, 149, 294, 342, 307
of the IPC and u/s. 25, 27 of the Arms Act. On the death of Murli,
offence u/s. 302 of the IPC was added. During investigation accused
Manoj, Devi Pahalwan, Munna Maratha, Mahesh Bhoi, Kanha @
Kanhaiyalal, Ravi Goud, Prem Rajput, Ramesh Bhoi, Bablu Goud and
Golu were arrested and on their disclosure memo the articles used in
commission of offence were recovered. The charge-sheet was filed. The
accused persons denied the charges and pleaded for trial.
The prosecution has examined 26 witnesses and marked 86
documents as exhibits. In defence, none of the accused examined any
witness. After appreciating the evidence came on record, learned
Sessions Judge vide impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the
present appellant as stated first. Hence, the present appeal before this
Court.
Shri Manohar Singh Chouhan, learned counsel for the appellant
Munna @ Kalpesh submits that only the presence of present appellant is
established and he has fired a gun shot, but one sustained the injuries.
Ballistic report does not confirm that the fire arm recovered from the
possession of the appellant was used in this crime. He was on bail
during the trial. The deceased died due to the gun shot injury caused by
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 07-01-2023
12:33:27
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No.610 of 2021
(MANOJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Mahesh and the Devi Singh by means of sword. He, therefore, prayed
for grant of bail to this appellant.
On the other hand, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the
respondent/State opposes the prayer by submitting that all the accused
had formed the unlawful assembly and with a common intention they
committed murder of Murli, therefore, the individual act of each and
every member of the assembly is immaterial. All the accused have
rightly been convicted and their jail sentence is not liable to be
suspended.
Shri M.I. Ansaari, learned counsel appearing for the objector also
opposes the prayer by submitting that the appellant has rightly been
convicted u/s. 302 of the IPC read with Section 148 and 149 of the IPC.
The presence of the present appellant has been established on the spot.
The police has recovered number of empty cartridges from the spot. The
other accused against whom there was no material have already been
acquitted, hence the application for suspension of custodial sentence of
present appellant is liable to be rejected.
As per FIR, the allegation of causing injury to Dinesh by means of
sword is against Devi and Mahesh who fired the gun shot on Murli. The
allegations against the present appellant - Munna @ Kalpesh is that they
came there along with others. No overt act has been attributed to
appellant in the FIR. Nothing has been recovered from the present
appellant. In view of the aforesaid, in the opinion of this Court, the jail
sentence of appellant - Munna @ Kalpesh is liable to be suspended.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 07-01-2023
12:33:27
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No.610 of 2021
(MANOJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.13589/2022) is allowed and
it is directed that subject to deposit of fine amount in the trial Court, if
not already deposited, and upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance
before the Registry of this Court, the execution of custodial part of the
sentence of appellant - Munna @ Kalpesh shall remain suspended till
the final disposal of this appeal. The appellant after being released on
bail shall mark his presence before the Registry of this Court on
24/04/2023 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this
behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Anushree
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 07-01-2023
12:33:27
