Suresh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 396 MP

                                       1 of 3




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                               AT GWALIOR
                                 CRA No. 8664 of 2018
                      (SURESH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


Dated : 06-01-2023
      Shri Dhirendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant No.1.

      Shri Pramod Pachori, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No. 17081 of 2022, which is second repeat application under Section

389(1) of Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the appellant No.1 Suresh seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Earlier application (I.A.No.17720/2020) was dismissed as

withdrawn vide order dated 08.12.2021.

Appellant No.1 stands convicted under Section 395 of IPC and sentenced to under

life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 07.09.2018 passed by Special Judge, MPDVPK Act Shivpuri in Special S.T. No.400089/2014.

As per prosecution case, on 01.08.2014 complainant Mohd. Salman Khan lodged a

Dehati Nalishi alleging that he is owner of the Truck bearing registration No. UP 36/T.9797.

Driver and cleaner of the truck namely Sarif Khan and Mohd. Kalam by the said truck were going from Village Chalees, Maharashtra to Sunawali Border, Nepal loaded with lemons in

the truck. As soon as they reached at Padora Bridge, the tyre of the truck got punctured.

When they alighted from the truck for changing punctured tyre, three-four persons having Lathi and hockey stick in their hands came there and started demanding money from them.

When they refused, the accused persons started assaulting them with Lathi and Hockey stick

and snatched mobile phones of the driver and cleaner of the truck, due to fear, the

complainant ran away towards Raju Hotel and informed the Police. Thereafter Police

reached the spot. The driver and cleaner of the truck were lying down in the bushes near the

truck. On the complaint, Crime No. 260/2014 under Section 394, 397 of IPC and 11/13 of

MPDVPK Act was registered against four unknown persons. The injured driver of the truck

succumbed to the injured sustained by him. Spot map was prepared. Statements of witnesses

were recorded. During investigation, it came out that aforesaid incident was committed by

the appellants. Appellants were arrested. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was 2 of 3

filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court upon critical

evaluation of the evidence placed on record and recording the statements of the material

witnesses has convicted and sentenced the appellant as referred above.

Learned counsel for the appellant No.1 submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is also submitted that Mohd. Kalam, Cleaner of the said truck has

not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. It is also submitted that during TIP,

appellant was not identified by the witnesses. During trial appellant No.1 was in custody for three months and since the date of judgment 7.9.2018 he is in custody. During trial,

appellant No.1 was on bail and he never misused the liberty so granted. Fine amount has

been deposited by him. It is also submitted that appellants No.2 and 3 have been granted

benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail by this court vide order dated 30.09.2022 and the present appellant seeks parity in treatment. Appeal is of the year 2018 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of this appeal in the near future. Under such circumstance,

learned counsel prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant.

On the contrary, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the application and

prayed for rejection of this application.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from

commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case, but regard

being had to the fact that appellant has already suffered jail incarceration of more than four years and that appeal is of the year 2018 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, the appellant is held entitled for suspension of jail sentence.

Accordingly, it is directed that the jail sentence of the appellant No.1 Suresh shall

remain suspended and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to

the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine

amount. Appellant No.1 is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court on

15.03.2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with following

further conditions:-

(i) the concerned jail authorities are directed that before releasing the appellant No.1, the medical examination of the appellant No.1 be 3 of 3

conducted through the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that she is having any symptoms of COVID-19, then the consequential follow up action or any further test required be undertaken immediately. If not, appellant No.1 shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order ;

(ii) violation of conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, I.A. No.17081 of 2022 stands allowed and disposed of.

Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.

Certified copy as per rules.

     (ROHIT ARYA)                                              (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
        JUDGE                                                           JUDGE

SP



              SANJEEV
              KUMAR
              PHANSE
              2023.01.06
              17:31:42
              +05'30'