Madhya Pradesh High Court
Naresh Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 June, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1743 of 2019
(NARESH KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 28-06-2023
Shri Vishal Daniel - Advocate for the appellant No.1 Naresh Kumar.
Shri Ajay Shukla - Government Advocate for the respondent-State of M.P.
Heard on I.A. No.137 of 2022, an application filed under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.1 Naresh Kumar
arising out of judgment dated 05/02/2019 delivered in S.T. No.71/2012 by Special Judge/
Addition Sessions Judge, Seoni.
This appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo RI for Life with fine of Rs.2000/-, under Section 148 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/- and under Section 25(1-kha) of Arms Act
and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulation.
At the outset, Shri Vishal Daniel, learned counsel for the appellant submits that this
Court on 11/12/2019 dismissed his previous application for suspension of sentence.
However, subsequently the Court was kind enough in suspending the remaining jail
sentence of co-accused Mahadev by order dated 15/12/2021. By taking this Court to the
prosecution story, it is submitted that the incident had taken place on 08/03/2012 and it
was alleged that deceased Imran was assaulted by appellants by means of different
weapons. Dehati Nalishi was lodged by Akeel Khan (PW-1). However, when he entered
the witness box, he did not identify the present appellant. Thus, Dehati Nalishi has lost
much of its shine so far present appellant is concerned, despite the fact that his name was
taken in the Delahi Nalishi. As per prosecution story, there were three eye witnesses
Akeel Khan (PW-1), Sammi (PW-16) and Shabnam (PW-17). The Court below in para-
57 of the impugned judgment disbelieved the statements of Sammi (PW-16) and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
6/28/2023 4:17:16 PM
Shabnam (PW-17) and gave a categorical finding that there is emballishment in their
statements. Thus, no eye witness in specific has mentioned about the overt act of present
appellant. So far oral dying declaration given to the wife of deceased Shabnam (PW-17)
is concerned, it is argued that in the said oral dying declaration, name of present appellant
and Mahadev was taken. Co-accused Mahadev is already granted the benefit of
suspension of sentence on 15/12/2021. In view of this susbsequent event, present
appellant may also be given the benefit of suspension of sentence. Moreso, when final
hearing of this appeal of 2019 is not possible in near future.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Advocate on the basis of
objection.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without expressing any conclusive
opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail
sentence of this appellant.
Accordingly, I.A. No.137 of 2022 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the remaining jail
sentence of appellant No.1 Naresh Kumar is hereby suspended and it is directed that
this appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) 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, Seoni on 4 th September, 2023 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by
the trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant prays for and is granted permission to withdraw
I.A.No.14274 of 2020.
I.A.No.14274 of 2020 is dismissed as withdrawn.
Certified copy as per rules.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
6/28/2023 4:17:16 PM
(SUJOY PAUL) (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
manju
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANJU
Signing time:
6/28/2023 4:17:16 PM
