Kalu @ Mukesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 3635 MP

                                                                   1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                         CRA No. 6530 of 2022
                                               (KALU @ MUKESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 01-03-2023
                                 Shri Akash Rathi, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                 Shri     Bhaskar      Agrawal,         learned     Govt.   Advocate         for   the
                           respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Admit.

Also, heard on I.A.No.14352/2022, which is first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of [email protected]

The trial Court has convicted the appellant vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.06.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kuksi, District-Dhar in S.T. No.38/2019 as under:-

                                   Conviction/                                              Imprisonment in
                                                      Imprisonment                Fine
                                  Section & Act                                               lieu of fine

                                  302 of the IPC    Life Imprisonment       Rs.15,000/-         2 years RI

                                  201 of the IPC         3 years            Rs.10,000/-       6 months RI

As per prosecution case, on 14.04.2019 at about 11 p.m. the appellant inflicted 18 injuries on the body of the [email protected] and due to the injuries deceased died.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no eye witness in the case and entire prosecution case depends on circumstantial evidences. Circumstances are not complete and also not exclusive against the appellant therefore, appellant could not be convicted in the offence. Witnesses of Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 01-03-2023 17:27:46

disclosure statement and seizure memo Sukhlaal (P.W.-9) and Chain Singh (P.W.-8) are related witnesses of the deceased therefore, their statement is not reliable. Appellant had no motive to kill the deceased. Weapons seized from open place therefore, it cannot be said that weapons seized at the instance of the present appellant. Appellant was in custody since 24.04.2019 to 24.07.2019 and he is also in custody from the date of impugned judgment i.e. 27.06.2012. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future therefore, it is prayed that the remaining jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he may be released on bail.

Per contra taking to the assistance of paragraph-54 of the impugned

judgment learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State submits that weapons darata and knife which were used in the crime were recovered in a well at the instance of the appellant. Soil on the spot was found on the shoes of present appellant. Blood stains clothes were recovered from the present appellant. FSL report (Exhibit-P/26) also supports the case of the prosecution. All circumstances found proved against the appellant therefore, it is prayed that application for suspension of jail sentence of the appellant is liable to be rejected.

We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, also considering evidences available on record against the appellant, at this stage we are not inclined to suspend the jail sentence and grant bail to the appellant. Accordingly, I.A.No.14352/2022 is rejected.

(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 01-03-2023 17:27:46

JUDGE JUDGE ajit

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 01-03-2023 17:27:46