Madhya Pradesh High Court
Puran Singh Sikarwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 July, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1179 of 2015
(PURAN SINGH SIKARWAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-07-2023
Shri Prem Singh Bhadoriya - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Rajesh Shukla - Additional Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Heard o n I.A.No.4912 of 2019, fourth application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant - Chote Singh.
Appellant stands convicted under Sections 307 and 302 of the IPC and
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and life imprisonment year
with a fine of Rs.500/- and Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulation vide
judgment o f conviction and order of sentence dated 03.11.2015 passed by
Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jora, Distt. Morena in Sessions Trial No.38
of 2008. So far, the appellant has undergone jail sentence for 11 years, 11
months and two days
As per prosecution story, an FIR was lodged by complainant Veerendra
Singh, that due to dispute between Pooran Singh and Complainant over a trivial
issue, Pooran Singh after selling of his immovable properties had left the village
and started living at village Mohanpura, Ambah for last one and half years
preceding the date of incidence i.e. 25.05.2007. On the fateful day, at about 4:30
in afternoon, Avdhesh, Shivraj, Pooran Singh, Ramkaran and four-five other
persons armed with katta (pistol) and present appellant Chote Singh armed
with mouser gun of Ramkaran Singh with common intention and motive came
on spot i.e., near the house of Jaikaran where complainant Veerendra Singh and
his brother Shivnath were sleeping. All accused persons started firing gun shot
and Chote Singh present appellant is alleged to have caused gun shot injury on
the chest of the deceased Shivnath who died on spot. On such allegations, FIR
was lodged. Investigation started an upon completion thereof final report was
submitted. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed
on record convicted and sentenced the appellant and other co-accused persons
as aforesaid.
During the course of hearing it has transpired that co-accused Pooran
and Shivraj have passed away in custody.
As per the report submitted by Central Jail, Gwalior, appellant so far has
undergone 11 years, 11 months and two days as against the sentence awarded.
Besides, as per the medical report received from the Central Jail, Gwalior, the
appellant is suffering from unbearable piles disease and is not able to perform
his routine work.
Shri Bhadoriya under such circumstances prays for suspension of
sentence primarily on the ground of long jail incarceration and unbearable piles
disease he is suffering from, duly certified by the Jail Doctor.
However, Shri Rajesh Shukla and Shri G.S. Sharma, Counsel for the
State and Complainant opposed the application with submission that there is a
direct evidence of involvement of the appellant in the instant case as due to gun
shot injury fired by him, deceased Shivnath suffered homicidal death. Hence,
appellant is not entitled for 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, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to the benefit of
suspension of sentence and grant of bail only for two reasons, namely, long jail
incarceration and suffering from unbearable piles disease.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and it is directed that the jail
sentence of the appellant s hall 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.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs 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 05.09.2023 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
2023.07.12
16:38:32 +05'30'
