Vinod @ Pappu Bhadauriya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr.
2023 Latest Caselaw 8700 MP

                                    1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT GWALIOR
                               CRA No. 137 of 2016
           (VINOD @ PAPPU BHADAURIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.)

Dated : 14-06-2023
      Shri D.S. Rajawat - Advocate for the appellant.

      Shri S.S. Kushwah - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.18941/2022, which is fourth repeat application filed on behalf of appellant under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Appellant stood convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to

undergo Life Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.12.2015 by First Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind in Sessions Trial No.02/15.

A s per prosecution story, the deceased-Urmila was the wife of one Narendra and the present appellant is brother of Narendra. After Narendra returned at about 5:30 pm on 25.07.2014, there was heated exchange between his wife/deceased-Urmila and his brother-Vinod. The appellant-Vinod is alleged to have caused fatal injuries below the eye and on neck of the deceased-Urmila. As a result, blood started oozing out and the deceased died homicidal death.

Despite being rushed to the hospital by Narendra, the deceased-Urmila could not survive. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record has convicted and sentenced the appellant as referred above.

Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the Sessions Court

did not appreciate the evidence placed on record in right perspective and committed grave illegality while convicting the appellant and sentenced as aforesaid. The judgment suffers from perversity of approach. Even otherwise, it is not a case of murder but shall fall under exception 4 of Section 300 of IPC i.e. sudden provocation. That apart, the appellant has already suffered incarceration of 8 years and 11 months, hence, prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the application supporting the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of the present application.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case, regard being had to the fact that present appellant has suffered incarceration of 8 years and 11 month; present appeal is of the year 2016 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, appellant is held entitled for suspension of jail sentence.

Accordingly, we allow IA No.18941/2022 and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of present appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lac and Fifty Thousand 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 is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 02.08.2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with following further conditions:-

( i) the concerned jail authorities are directed that before

releasing the appellant, the medical examination of appellant be conducted through the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that he is having any symptoms of COVID-19, then the consequential follow up action or any further test required be undertaken immediately. If not, appellant shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order ;

(ii) violation of conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, IA No.18941/2022 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)                                                                      (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
     JUDGE                                                                                   JUDGE

neetu
NEETU   Digitally signed by NEETU SHASHANK
        DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
        PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH
        COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH




SHASH
        GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya
        Pradesh,
        2.5.4.20=36b486bb0d381b950e435ec09e06
        6bc6b58cb947c1474b7dc349a1cf27eaa2ce,
        pseudonym=C09AF52B2B8D28DBCFF3D4A
        07CC4C71E915C48FC,




ANK
        serialNumber=E60A9BBFC39E0EE500EAAD
        E1E0B3B8565CB3A7DC9F5CD048197DF0FF
        3149AE58, cn=NEETU SHASHANK
        Date: 2023.06.15 17:44:18 +05'30'