Kunwar Adhar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 10281 MP

                                   1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                             CRA No. 17 of 2020
             (KUNWAR ADHAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 06-07-2023
      Shri Saket Malik - Advocate for the appellant.

      Shri Ajay Shukla - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Heard on IA No. 20403/2022- an application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail to appellantS - Kunwar Aadhar and Rammanoj Yadav arising out of

judgment dated 23.10.2019 delivered in ST No. 01/2018 by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Devsar, District Singrauli.

The appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and Section 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 months with fine of Rs. 100/- with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that on 04.06.2017, a sudden quarrel had taken place between accused persons and deceased Ramdhyan Yadav. The incident was relating to utilizing 'Khapda' roof tiles and said quarrel

took an ugly shape because of which appellans allegedly assaulted Ramdhyan Yadav by means of lathi. Ramdhyan succumbed to the injuries. Three injuries were found on the person of deceased. Injury No. 2 proved fatal. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that in the post mortem report, no definite finding was given that injuries so caused were sufficient to cause death. Apart from this, the factual backdrop of the incident shows that there was no premeditation or intention to kill Ramdhyam Yadav. A sudden quarrel resulted

into the assault and therefore, necessary ingredients to attract Section 302 of IPC are not available. Appellant No. 1 remained in custody from 05.06.2017 to 25.09.2017 and from date of judgment to till date. Similarly, appellant No. 2 remained in custody between 17.06.2017 to 25.09.2017 and from 05.10.2019, he is again in custody. The final hearing of this appeal of 2020 is not possible in near future, thus, the remaining jail sentence of the appellants may be suspended.

The prayer is opposed by learned State counsel.

Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and period of custody without expressing any conclusive opinion on merits, we deem it proper to

suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellants.

Accordingly, aforesaid IA is allowed.

Subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, the remaining jail sentence of the appellants- Kunwar Aadhar and Rammanoj Yadav is hereby suspended and it is directed that the appellants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) each with one solvent surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with a further direction to appear before the concerning trial court Devsar, District Singrauli on 27.09.2023 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

C c as per rules.

            (SUJOY PAUL)                                   (ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
               JUDGE                                               JUDGE

DigitallyL.R.
         signed by LALIT
SINGH RANA
Date: 2023.07.07 10:17:00
+05'30'