Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jaikaran Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 January, 2023
Author: Sheel Nagu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 3142 of 2022
(JAIKARAN PRAJAPATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-01-2023
Shri R.S. Mehndiratta - Advocate for appellant.
Shri A.D. Bajpai - Govt. Advocate for State
I.A. No.11834/2022 - first application moved on behalf of the sole
appellant - Jaikaran Prajapati for suspension of sentence and grant of bail
under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C., is taken up and considered along with reply of
the State.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 12.02.2022 passed in
S.T.No.26/2019 by Additional Sessions Judge, Gauharganj, District Raisen
(M.P.) whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable
under Sections 407, 392, 364, 328, 302, 201 and 420 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo R.I. 3 years, 7 years, 10 years, for life, R.I. for 3 years, and 7 years
with fine of Rs.1000/-, Rs.1000/-, Rs.2000/-, Rs.5000/-, Rs.1000/- and
Rs.1000/- respectively, with default stipulation.
It is contended by learned counsel for appellant that the appellant has
been convicted by the trial Court only on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
It is further contended by the counsel that there is no eye witness and as there
was allegation against the appellant that he was last seen with the deceased,
therefore, he has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned hereinbefore.
It is further contended by the learned counsel that the appellant herein,
was appointed as driver to ply the truck bearing registration No.MH-18BA-4198
and the deceased was cleaner in the same truck. It is contended by the learned
counsel that as the appellant was only appointed a day before the date of the
incident, there was no question of any faction rivalry or oblique motive to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/16/2023
1:02:47 PM
commit the crime in question.
It is further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the
dead-body was recovered at a remote place in Chanderi on 8-5-2018 and,
therefore, in absence of completion of chain of events, there could not have
been any conviction against the appellant. The appellant as has remained in
custody for a period of 4 years and 8 months, he deserves to be enlarged on
bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for State submits that in terms of the
prosecution evidence, as the appellant was the person who was last seen along
with the deceased, he has been rightly convicted, inasmuch as, there were
injuries, which found on the dead-body of the deceased. Thus, learned
counsel submits that looking to the allegations levelled against the appellant, he
is not entitled for grant of bail.
Heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the
records.
In the present case, a perusal of para 41 of the judgment reflects that the
appellant has been convicted, as he was last seen with the deceased on
01.05.2018 and later on, dead-body of the deceased was recovered.
Undisputedly, there is no eye witness in the present case.
Thus, in view of the aforesaid, while taking into consideration the period
of custody underwent by the appellant, without expressing any opinion on
merits of the case, we deem it proper to enlarge the appellant on bail.
It is directed that jail sentence of appellant - Jaikaran Prajapati will
remain under suspension subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already
deposited, and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties of the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/16/2023
1:02:47 PM
like amount to the satisfaction of concerned CJM for his appearance before
concerned CJM on 30.01.2023 and on such further dates as may be fixed in
this regard which shall be of frequency not less than once a year. In addition of
above, the appellant shall also mark his appearance before the concerned police
station every fortnight during the period of suspension of jail sentence.
In case, appellant is found absent on any date fixed by the concerned
available Magistrate, then concerned available Magistrate shall be free to issue
and execute warrant of arrest for securing his presence without first referring the
matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.
Learned concerned available Magistrate and the prosecution is directed to
ensure following of Covid-19 precautionary protocol prescribed from time to
time by the Supreme Court, the Central Govt. as well as the State Govt. during
release, travel and residence of the appellant during period of suspension of
sentence as a consequence of this order.
I.A. No.11834/2022 is accordingly allowed.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
Certified as per rules.
(SHEEL NAGU) (MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE JUDGE
ac
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 1/16/2023
1:02:47 PM
