Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashok Kumar Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 July, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRR No. 2314 of 2023
(ASHOK KUMAR PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 28-07-2023
Shri R. S. Patel - Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Seema Jaiswal - Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.
Record of Courts below is available.
Heard on question of admission.
This revision being arguable is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A No.12843/2023, which is first application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved
on behalf of the applicant.
T h e applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 411 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with fine of
Rs.500/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He further submits that there is no
likelihood of the hearing of revision in near future. The applicant undertakes to
abide all the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the
application for suspension of sentence may be considered.
Learned counsel for the respondent has objected the aforesaid prayer.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment.
The present applicant has been held convicted for the offence under
Section 411 of IPC.
The facts of the case are that co-accused took possession of the tractor
from one Dashrath Gond, who failed to pay tractor loan. Co-accused Narendra
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: POONAM
MANEKAR
Signing time: 7/31/2023
2:39:09 PM
was legally authorized to take its possession under the recovery proceedings,
but after taking possession of the vehicle, he failed to report its seizure and
lodged a false report claiming that tractor had gone missing. The tractor was
later recovered from the possession of applicant. On the basis of appreciation
of evidence, it was found proved by the trial Court that co-accused Narendra
was guilty of breach of trust regarding that tractor and it was also found proved
that applicant failed to account for his possession.
It was claimed by the applicant that he was a bonafide purchaser, but he
could not prove any documents regarding legality of his possession. In the light
of well reasoned judgement of the two Courts below, this Court finds no
substantial reason to interfere in the sentence awarded against the applicant.
The applicant has relied upon the decision of Shiv Kumar Vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh passed in Cr.A. No.1503/2022 . In this case stolen utensils
were found in possession of appellant, but tractor which needs registration with
a competent authority cannot be equated with house hold utensils. It was the
duty of applicant to ensure that he was purchasing the vehicle from its
registered owner, but no document to that effect was produced before the trial
Court.
I n the light of facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not
inclined to suspend the sentence and release the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, this application is hereby dismissed.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
pnm
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: POONAM
MANEKAR
Signing time: 7/31/2023
2:39:09 PM
