Pappu Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 11294 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                      CRA No. 3895 of 2023
                                        (PAPPU MEENA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 20-07-2023
                                 Shri Anand Kumar Gupta - Advocate for the appellants.

                                 Shri A.K.Nirankari - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard o n I.A.No.5138/2023, which is first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant No.3 - Sumitra Bai seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Present appellant stands convicted under Section 148 of IPC (5 counts) and sentenced to undergo 02 years RI with fine of Rs.500/- (5 counts) with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.02.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chachouda, District Guna (M.P.) in Sessions Trial CIS No.236/2015, 03/2017 and 50/2017.

Appellant so far has undergone about 06 months of incarceration. As per prosecution story, an FIR was lodged with the allegations that Bheekam Singh Meena lodged a complaint at about 8:00 PM on 09/06/2015 to the effect that at about 6:00 PM in the evening on the same day while he along-

with his brother Tara Singh, Ramswaroop Meena, Ram Prasad Meena, Kailash Sharma and Prem Bai was sitting near the main door of the house, Ghanshyam Meena, Kamlesh Meena, Ramhet Meena, Pappu Meena, Brajmohan Meena, Niranjan Meena, Babli Meena and Sumitra Meena (appellant) came there armed with lathi, farsi and gun. Niranjan Meena is alleged to have fired two gunshots hitting Tara Singh Meena on his temple (forehead) and one bullet was fired by Niranjan Meena and the second bullet was fired by Ramhet hitting Kailash Sharma on his legs. Other persons are alleged to have caused injuries with lathi, Signature Not Verified Signed by: MONIKA SHARMA Signing time: 21-07-2023 10:26:16 AM

danda and farsi. As a result, Ramswaroop, Ramprasad Meena and Prem Bai Meena suffered injuries. Investigation was started. Upon completion of investigation, challan was filed. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record has convicted and sentenced the present appellant with the help of Section 149 of IPC as aforesaid and sentence accordingly.

Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned judgment inter-alia submits that as a matter of fact, bare perusal of FIR/final report suggests that there is some rival relations/family rivalry between both the parties. The appellant, a lady, is implicated in this case with the help of Section

149 of IPC despite there is no allegation of any act much less overt act attributed to her except shouting the name of the complainant party. The appellant, a lady, having no criminal antecedents is made to suffer jail incarceration due to aforesaid false implication. Appellant's case is different on two counts; firstly, she is a lady and secondly, there is no act much less on overt act attributed to her. On these submissions, learned counsel for appellant prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present appellant.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State opposes the application supporting the order impugned with submission that this is the case of unlawful assembly where accused party is found to have been armed with lathi, farsi and gun. Two gunshot injuries were fired by two co-accused persons. Besides, appellant is one of the persons who is alleged to have caused injuries with lathi. However, he fairly submits that there is no specific allegation against the present appellant in this behalf. He submits that no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present

Signature Not Verified appellant.

Signed by: MONIKA SHARMA Signing time: 21-07-2023 10:26:16 AM

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case, but regard being had to the fact that the appellant is a lady and has already suffered jail incarceration of 06 months, in the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the fact that the appeal is of the year 2023 and there is no likelihood of its early hearing of the appeal in the near future, the application deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, we allow the application and it is directed that the jail sentence of present appellant No.3 - Sumitra Bai shall remain suspended and she be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant No.3- Sumitra Bai is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court on 22.09.2023 and thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this behalf.

Accordingly, I.A. No.5138/2023 stands allowed and disposed of. 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.

Certified copy as per rules.

                             (ROHIT ARYA)                                    (SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
                                JUDGE                                                 JUDGE

                           Monika




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MONIKA
SHARMA
Signing time: 21-07-2023
10:26:16 AM