Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hardev vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 July, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 12458 of 2022
(HARDEV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 25-07-2023
Shri Surendra Singh, Senior Advocate with Shri Kapil Pathak-
Advocate for the appellant.
Shri S.K. Kashyap-Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Aniruddh Hingwasia - Advocate for the objector.
Heard on I.A. No.24855/2022, an application under Section 389(1)
of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail
to appellant Hardev arising out of judgment dated 06.12.2022 delivered
in S.T. No.100312/2015 by Additional Judge to the Court of First
Additonal Sessions Judge, Bijawar, District Chhatarpur.
The appellant has been convicted under Section 147 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs. 500/- and Section
302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine of Rs.
5000/- with default stipulations.
Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is
innocent and on account of political enmity, he has been falsely implicated
in the matter. It is submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove the
case against the appellant beyond the reasonable doubt. Learned senior
counsel for the appellant relying upon the judgments in the case of Jainul
Haque Vs. State of Bihar, (1974) 3 SCC 543 and in the case of
Balwantbhai B. Patel VS. State of Gurajat and others, (2009) 10
SCC 684 submits that allegation against the appellant is that he along with
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: S HUSHMAT
HUSSAIN
Signing time: 7/27/2023
2:59:07 PM
co-accused Hardev Singh and Imrat Lodhi exhorted co-accused Hakim
Singh and Raghvendra Singh "मारो मादरचोद को मारो....... जंदा ना बचने पाये".
Thereupon co-accused Hakim Singh, Raghvendra Singh and Imrat fired
on deceased. He also urges that it is highly improbable that three
persons will use the same language. Deceased has sustained only two
injuries whereas five persons have been arraigned as accused. On above
grounds he prays that the remaining jail sentence of the appellant may be
suspended and he be released on bail.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Advocate as well as
learned counsel for the objector.
Perusal of record of the trial Court shows that allegations against the
present appellant (Hardev) is that he along with co-accused Morpal and
Imrat Lodhi exhorted co-accused Hakim Singh and Raghvendra Singh
"मारो मादरचोद को मारो....... जंदा ना बचने पाये". Thereupon, Hakim Singh,
Raghvendra Singh and Imrat fired on deceased. We have perused
documents filed by objector Annexure-D-1, D-4/D-5. Perusal of
Annexure-D/4-D/5 shows that on 19.03.2016, F.I.R. (Annexure-D-4/D-5)
was lodged by one Brijlal agains t the present appellant Hardev
Singh/Morpal Singh and other co-accused to the effect that they
threatened him not to depose in the murder case. Perusal of F.I.R.
(Annexure-D-1) shows that after present incident, which is dated
13.07.2015, Indrapratap complainant of the present case, has been
murdered and with respect to same, FIR (Annexure D/1) has been lodged
against Morpal, Hakim Singh, Hardev (present appellant), Imrat Lodhi and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: S HUSHMAT
HUSSAIN
Signing time: 7/27/2023
2:59:07 PM
Harischandra Lodhi.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and after taking
into consideration Annexure D/1 to D/4, we deem it not proper to suspend
the remaining jail sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A No.24855/2022 is dismissed.
(SUJOY PAUL) (ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: S HUSHMAT
HUSSAIN
Signing time: 7/27/2023
2:59:07 PM
