Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shankar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 July, 2023
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1404 of 2022
(SHANKAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-07-2023
Ms. Sarika Athale, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri K. K. Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
(1) Heard on I.A.No.5740/2023, which is first application filed under
Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for suspension of jail
sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant-Shankar S/o Somla @
Somaji.
(2) The appellant has been convicted vide judgment dated 09.11.2016
passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Badwani, District Badwani in
S.T.No.66/2016 and sentenced him as under:-
Imprisonment
Section & Act Imprisonment Fine in lieu of fine
amount
302 of IPC Life
Rs.10,000/- 2 Years R.I.
Imprisonment
(3) As per prosecution story, on 08.05.2016 at around 8:30 at village
Piplaj near the house of Kiran Patidar, in front of Tulsiram's plot, a fight
occurred between the appellant and his brother-in-law Salakram (deceased)
because of some monetary transaction. The appellant abused the deceased and
Signature Not Verified
hit him with stone on his head with an intention of killing and as a result of
Signed by: REENA JOSEPH
Signing time: 7/12/2023
10:16:12 AM
which deceased Salakram died. Accordingly, case has been registered against
the appellant. After investigation charge sheet was filed and the trial Court found
the appellant guilty under the aforementioned Section.
(4) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned
judgment is contrary to law and facts. The trial Court has erred by convicting
and sentencing the appellant in absence of any material evidence. She further
submitted that appellant did not cause any injury on the vital part of the body of
the deceased. The same is not caused because it was never an intention of the
appellant to attempt on the life of the deceased. It is a case of sudden quarrel
and the appellant was not armed with any deadly weapon. The trial Court has
erred by not marshaling the documentary evidence as well as oral evidence.
Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Hence, prays for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
(5) Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State opposes the
prayer for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection.
(6) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
(7) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that it
is a case of sudden quarrel, in view of the material available on record against
the appellant, coupled with the fact that final hearing of this appeal is not
possible in near future, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case,
we are of the opinion that the jail sentence of appellant is liable to be
suspended.
(8) Accordingly, I.A.No.5740/2023 is allowed and it is directed subject
to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing personal
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: REENA JOSEPH
Signing time: 7/12/2023
10:16:12 AM
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, the
execution of remaining custodial part of the sentence of the appellant shall
remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.
(9) The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence
before the trial Court on 21/12/2023 and thereafter on all such subsequent
dates, as may be fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly I.A.No.5740/2023 stands allowed and disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (HIRDESH)
JUDGE JUDGE
RJ
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: REENA JOSEPH
Signing time: 7/12/2023
10:16:12 AM
