Madhya Pradesh High Court
Indur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 July, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4368 of 2022
(INDUR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA No. 4845 of 2022
(NANNE @ NANNELAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 27-07-2023
Shri Surendra Singh - Senior Advocate with Shri Shivam Singh -
Advocate for appellants No. 2 Hallu alias Daulat and No.4 Devi Singh in
CRA No.4368 of 2022.
Shri Madan Singh - Advocate for appellant No.1 Indur.
Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra - Advocate for appellant No.3.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Patel - Advocate for appellants No. 1, 2 & 3 in
CRA No.4845 of 2022.
Shri Yogesh Dhande - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A No.903 of 2023, an application under Section 389(1) of
the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.1 Indur
& I.A.No. 14594 of 2023 for appellants No.2 Hallu alias Daulat and No.4 Devi
Singh (CRA No.4368 of 2022) and I.A.No.10390 of 2022 for appellants No.1
Nanne alias Nannelal, No.2 Gudda alias Ganesh & No.3 Ramsu alias Ramesh
(CRA No.4845 of 2022) arising out of judgment dated 29/04/2022 delivered in
S.T. No.1000203/2011 by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Hatta, District
Damoh (MP).
The aforesaid appellants have been convicted under Section 148 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one-one year with fine of Rs.500-500/- and
Section 302/149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine of
Rs.5,000 - Rs.5000/-, with default stipulation.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
7/28/2023 12:54:32 PM
Learned counsel for the parties at the outset submit that no previous
application of these appellants for suspension of sentence was dismissed on
merits.
By taking this Court to the prosecution story, Shri Surendra Singh,
learned senior counsel submits that on 30/06/2013, the appellants allegedly
assaulted Mukesh S/o Gopi by means of deadly weapons. Mukesh succumbed
to the said injuries on 02/07/2013. Learned senior counsel submits that Ex.P/1 is
the MLC conducted by Dr. Sandeep Palandi (PW-1), three injuries were found
on the person of deceased. After the MLC, Mukesh was taken to Metro
Hospital Jabalpur where he died on 02/07/2013. The Autopsy report proved by
Dr. Ashok Jain (PW-12) shows the similar injuries were found on the person of
deceased. The funeral of Mukesh took place on 02/07/2013. The FIR was
lodged on 06/07/2013 by father of deceased namely Gopi. Thus, there is
inordinate and unexplained delay in lodging the FIR.
Learned senior counsel while advancing the leading argument on behalf of
the appellants urged that in fact the statement of Gopi (PW-2) makes it clear
that at Damoh itself, the police was informed about the incident of assault on
Mukesh. The said information was repeated at Metro Hospital, but for the
reasons best known to the prosecution these informations given to the police
were not produced in the matter. Thus, an adverse inference needs to be drawn
against the prosecution.
Learned senior counsel further submits that in the FIR, name of 8
persons were taken and two persons were shown as 'unknown'. Only three
injuries were found. If it was the story of prosecution that multiple injuries were
caused by 10 persons by deadly weapons, it is difficult to believe that only
Signature Not Verified
three injuries could be received by the victim. This itself creates serious doubt
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
7/28/2023 12:54:32 PM
on the story of prosecution. The tendency to rope in number of innocent
persons in a case of this nature is not unknown to law. By placing reliance on
AIR 1991 SC page 4 (Budhwa alias Ramcharan and others vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh), it is submitted that such story of prosecution deserves to
be disbelieved and discarded.
Next submission is that 'marg' intimation was recorded through Ex.P/2.
Gopi (PW-2) in his deposition admitted that at the time of recording of 'marg'
intimation, he was very much present. Thus, in all fairness, Gopi should have
mentioned the name of assailants, so that, the same could have been reduced in
writing in the 'marg' intimation.
Relating to argument about non-disclosure of previous report, learned
senior counsel relied on AIR 1981 SCC 1230 (Sevi and another vs. State of
Tamil Nadu and another).
Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate while arguing for appellants No.1 Nanne alias
Nannelal, No.2 Gudda alias Ganesh & No.3 Ramsu alias Ramesh urged that as
per the prosecution story, geti and lathi were recovered from them and in both
the weapons, human blood was found as per FSL report (Ex.P/3). However,
this incriminating material/FSL report was not confronted to them while asking
questions under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. Thus, this report cannot be used
against the said appellants.
Apart from this, the seizure of weapons had taken place on 15/07/2013.
Samples were sent to FSL on 22/09/2013 and report of FSL came on
11/10/2013. The prosecution has not led any evidence to establish that between
15/07/2013 to 22/09/2013, the samples were safely kept in Malkhana or
elsewhere. In absence thereof, the prosecutions story is highly doubtful.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
7/28/2023 12:54:32 PM
Shri Madan Singh, Advocate also argued in the same line.
Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer
on the basis of objection. He reliance on various paragraphs of the objection.
We have heard the parties for quite some time and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without expressing any
conclusive opinion on merits, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail
sentence of these appellants.
Accordingly, I.A. No.903 of 2023, I.A.No.14594 of 2023 &
I.A.No.10390 of 2022 are allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of appellants - Indur, Hallu alias Dault, Devi Singh
(in CRA No.4368 of 2022) and appellants Nanne alias Nannelal, gudda
alias Ganesh & Ramsu alias Ramesh (in CRA No. 4845 of 2022) are
hereby suspended and it is directed that these appellants be released on bail on
their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand only) e a c h with one solvent surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the trial
Court, District Damoh on 16 th October, 2023 and also on such other dates
as may be fixed by the said Court in this regard during the pendency of this
appeal.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
manju
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
7/28/2023 12:54:32 PM
