Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shyamsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 March, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 9451 of 2022
(SHYAMSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-03-2023
Shri Virendra Sharma - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Rajendra Suryavanshi - Deputy Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on IA.No.72/2023, which is an application for urgent hearing.
Matter is already taken up for hearing, therefore, urgent hearing
application stands disposed off being rendered infructuous.
Also heard on I.A.No.16133/2022, which is first application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail
sentence on behalf of the sole appellant Shyam Singh.
Appellant stands convicted vide judgment dated 30/09/2022 passed in
S.T.No.30/2021 by II Additional Sessions Judge, Mahidpur, District Ujjain
(M.P.) under Sections 307, 324, 341 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
and has been sentenced to undergo 10 years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/-, 02
years RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-, only fine of Rs.500/- and only fine of
Rs.1,000/- respectively with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submit that appellant is an innocent
person and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. A cross case has been
registered against the complainant party herein but on the same set of evidence
accused persons in the cross case have been acquitted. Shyam Singh has also
sustained injury in the incident, which is not explained by the prosecution. There
are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses.
Appellant is languishing in jail since 01/05/2021 and has already suffered jail
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 3/16/2023
12:37:19 PM
incarceration for more than one year and ten months. Co-accused persons
have been enlarged on bail by their jail sentence has been suspended. Looking
to old pendency of the cases for consideration, final conclusion of this appeal
would take sufficient long time. There is a strong case in favour of the appellant.
Hence, the execution of the remaining part of the jail sentence of the appellant
be suspended till the final disposal of this appeal.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the
application for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the
allegation levelled against the appellant and also taking note of the fact that cross
case has been registered against the opponent party and they have been
acquitted, therefore, Nan Singh has preferred an appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal
No.2405/2023 before this Court, which is still pending; as per the MLC (Ex.-
D/8) Shyam Singh also sustained injury in the incident; he has already suffered
jail incarceration for about one year and ten months and final conclusion of the
appeal will also take sufficient long time. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, I find it is to be a fit case to suspend the remaining
custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No.16133/2022 is allowed and it is directed subject to
deposit of fine any amount, if not already deposited, and subject to furnishing
personal bond by the appellant in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy
Five Thousand Only) with separate solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of learned trial Court, the execution of remaining custodial part of
the sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this
appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 3/16/2023
12:37:19 PM
The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before
the Registry of this Court on 12/09/2023 and on all such subsequent dates,
which are fixed in this behalf.
Registry is directed to list the appeal for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
Tej
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 3/16/2023
12:37:19 PM
