Neeraj Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4009 MP

                                    1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT GWALIOR
                               CRA No. 1027 of 2014
                   (NEERAJ SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 14-03-2023
      Shri R.K. Sharma - Senior Advocate with Shri V.K. Agarwal -

Advocate for the appellant.
      Shri Nirmal Sharma - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.16414/2022, which is third application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on

behalf of appellant- Neeraj.

Appellant stood convicted for the offence under Sections 302 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.50,000/- with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.09.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Lahar, District Bhind, in Sessions Trial No.324 of 2011. As per record, appellant so far has undergone almost 10 years of jail sentence (falling short of five days excluding remission).

As per prosecution story, while the deceased Yagvendra as a pillion rider was riding the motorcycle with his brother Satendra, on the way

appellant/accused Neeraj and Vipin intercepted the complainant party and hurled filthy abuses with the threat of dire consequences as to how did they dare to touch their motorcycle. The appellant Neeraj alleged to be armed with .315 bore gun aimed it at Satendra. Though Satendra tried to pacify him, but on the exhortation of Vipin, appellant Neeraj is alleged to have fired two gunshots hitting the abdomen of deceased Yagvendra and owing to which, the blood started oozing out. Deceased Yagvendra fell on the ground and suffered homicidal death. On the aforesaid, FIR was filed, investigation was completed

and challan was filed. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record has convicted the appellant as aforesaid.

Shri Rakesh Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellant fairly does not insist upon the merits of the case while addressing this Court on the instant I.A., instead he prays for suspension of sentence only for the reason of long jail incarceration. He submits that if the period of remission is included, the appellant by now has completed more than 10 years of jail sentence. Appellant was a young person at the time of commission of crime with no criminal record and if he continues to be in jail to complete his jail sentence he shall suffer mental agony. No rifle was recovered from the possession of the appellant and

therefore, his false implication cannot be ruled out. Appeal is of the year 2014. There is no likelihood of the appeal coming up for hearing in the near future. Hence, learned counsel for appellant prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the present appellant.

P e r contra, Shri Nirmal Sharma, Counsel for the State oppose the application with submission that appellant is the main accused. He has fired two gunshot injuries causing homicidal death of deceased Yagvendra. Hence, no exception thereto can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the case but regard being had to the fact that admittedly, appellant has suffered jail incarceration for 10 years excluding remission, therefore, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that sentence awarded to the appellant may be suspended pending disposal of the appeal.

It is, accordingly, directed that execution of jail sentences of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged

on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and also subject to deposit of the fine amount (if no t already deposited) for appearance before the Registry of this Court on 02/05/2023, and on further dates as may be directed by the Registry in that regard, 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) in case of violation of conditions, State is free to apply for cancellation of bail.

Accordingly, the I.A.No.16414/2022 stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

List in due course.

    (ROHIT ARYA)                                               (SUNITA YADAV)
       JUDGE                                                        JUDGE

 Monika

MONIKA SHARMA
2023.03.14 17:18:51
+05'30'