Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pappu @ Kapora vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 January, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1828 of 2022
(PAPPU @ KAPORA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 06-01-2023
Shri Madan Singh - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri L.N.Sakle - Advocate for the objector.
Heard on I.A.No.13273/2022, an application for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail to the appellant - Pappu @ Kapora arising out of judgment
dated 31/01/2022 delivered in S.T. No.100203/2013 by Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Hatta, District Damoh (M.P).
T he appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 r/w 149, 120-B,
201 and 148 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine
of Rs.5000/-, Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.3000/- R.I for 5 years with fine
of Rs.1000/- and R.I for 2 years with fine of Rs.1000/- respectively and under
Section 25(1-B) of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with fine
of Rs.2000/- with default stipulations.
By taking this Court to the prosecution story, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that on 19.07.2013, Ramayan Path was going on in the
house of deceased. The deceased left the place of ceremony to attend the call
of nature. He did not return on the same day. On the next day i.e. 21.07.2013,
his body was recovered near Riyana nala. Learned counsel for the appellant
submits that there is no eye witness to the incident. The prosecution treated two
witnesses as eye witnesses i.e. P.W-10 and P.W-11. By taking this Court to
Signature Not Verified
SAN
both the statements, it is urged that none of them have taken the name of
Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA
CHOUBEY
Date: 2023.01.06 16:28:33 IST
present appellant as assailant. P.W-12 is not an eye witness. Para 44 of
impugned judgment shows that memorandum of co-accused Kallan Adiwasi
was recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act wherein he deposed that
the country made pistol (katta) by which Bharat @ Santosh Kurmi was
murdered, was given by him to present appellant Pappu @ Kapora. Shri Madan
Singh, learned counsel for the appellant submits that by no stretch of
imagination, the appellant can be held guilty for committing offence under
Section 302 of IPC even if it is accepted that after murdering the deceased the
weapon was handed over to him by co-accused Kallan Adiwasi. He placed
reliance on 2019 (3) MPLJ(Cri)(SC) 263 Farida Begum Vs. State of
Uttarakhand. In this view of the matter, he prayed that appellant may be given
benefit of suspension of sentence.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Advocate as well as
learned counsel for the objector on the basis of objection.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without expressing any
conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No. 13273 of 2022 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed
that on furnishing personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty
Thousand Only) along with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court by the appellant Pappu @ Kapora be released on bail with a
further direction to remain present before the concerned Trial Court - Hatta,
Signature Not Verified
District Damoh on 17th April, 2023 and on such other dates as may be
SAN
Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA
fixed by the trial court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
CHOUBEY
Date: 2023.01.06 16:28:33 IST
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
anu
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA
CHOUBEY
Date: 2023.01.06 16:28:33 IST
