Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kalla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 July, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 760 of 2014
(KALLA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 04-07-2023
Shri R.K. Shrivastava and Shri Vijay Kumar Jha - Advocate for the
appellant- Kall
Shri A.K. Jain- Advocate for appellant-Omprakash.
Shri Rajesh Shukla - Additional Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave of this Court to withdraw
IA No. 1021 of 2022, fifth application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellant-
Omprakash.
Prayer accepted.
Accordingly, IA No. 1021 of 2022 stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Heard o n I.A.No.11151 of 2023 , third application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant - Kalla. First application (I.A. No.25099 of 2017) was dismissed as
withdrawn vide order dated 31.01.2020 and second application (I.A. No. 10855
of 2021) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 03.12.2021.
Appellant stands convicted under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.3,000/- with default
stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.05.2014
passed by first Additional Sessions Judge, Mungawali, Distt. Ashoknagar in
Sessions Trial No.178 of 2011. So far the appellant has undergone jail sentence
for 11 years 9 months and 29 days as on 13th of June, 2023.
A s per prosecution story, appellant is alleged to have had love affairs
with Rajbai (PW/3) daughter of deceased Shrilal. On the fateful day while
deceased Shrilal was going on a motorcycle, he was intercepted by accused
persons. It is alleged that the appellant was armed with rod, co-accused
Omprakash was armed with Pharsa, Munnalal with Lathi and Rabudibai with
Danda. It is further alleged that accused Kalla gave severe blow on the occipital
region of the deceased. Likewise, co-accused Omprakash is alleged to have
caused blow with Farsa on the same region. Besides, Munnalal hit him on
different parts of the body while he had fallen down. Rabudibai is alleged to
have caused injury to the son of deceased Mahendra (PW/1) who had
witnessed the incident. After the incident, Shrilal was rushed to the hospital but
to no avail as during treatment he had passed away. As such, he died homicidal
death. On such allegations, FIR was registered. Investigation started.
Incriminating material was collected. Besides, statements of witnesses were
recorded u/s. 161 of Cr.P.C. Upon completion of investigation challan was
filed. Case was committed to Court of Sessions for Trial. The Session Court
upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record convicted and
sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.
Shri R.K. Shrivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant while taking
exception to the impugned judgement inter alia supported the instant
application primarily on the ground of long jail incarceration as so far, appellant
till 13th of June, 2023 has undergone 11 years, 9 months and 29 days of
incarceration. That apart, learned Counsel submits that accepting the
prosecution story it shall be a case falling u/s. 304 part I of the IPC. Due to
long jail incarceration, the family of the appellant is in penury. The appeal is of
the year 2014 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of appeal. On aforesaid
submissions, prayed for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
P er contra Shri Shukla opposes the application while supporting the
impugned judgment submitting that it is a case of cold-blooded murder. The
appellant in front of eye witness Mahendra (PW/1) has caused injury with iron
rod on the occipital region of the deceased which led to his homicidal death.
Therefore, it is a clear case of Section 302 of IPC. Hence, no exception can be
taken in the matter of suspension of sentence.
Upon hearing counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from
commenting upon the rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, regard being had to the fact that the appellant so far has undergone 11
years, 9 months and 29 days till 13th of June, 2023, hence, in the obtaining facts
and circumstances, the appellant is held entitle to the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and it is directed that the jail
sentence of the appellant- Kalla shall remain suspended during pendency of
the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to verification of the
factum of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. He is
directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 28.08.2023 and
thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
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.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for
compliance.
Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
(ROHIT ARYA) (SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE JUDGE
ar
ABDUR RAHMAN
2023.07.05
14:18:15 +05'30'
