Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Murari Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4294 MP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4294 MP
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2023

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Murari Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 March, 2023
Author: Atul Sreedharan
                                    1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT GWALIOR
                           CRA No. 12468 of 2022
                   (MURARI JATAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 17-03-2023
      Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Shri APS Tomar, learned PL for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No. 3157/2023, which is an application moved on behalf of appellant -Murari Jatav under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of his remaining jail sentence and admission to bail.

By the impugned judgment, appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 419/120-B, 420/120-B, 467/120-B, 468/120-B and 471/120-B of IPC and sentenced to suffer various terms of sentences, maximum of which is seven years RI with fine and default stipulation.

The case of the prosecution is that the appellant was an active conspirator in the case, where, the principal accused has defrauded the complainant of 25 lac rupees.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant Purushhottam, who was allegedly approached by one Rupa alias Roopsingh,

who brought alongwith him another person by the name of Kamlesh. The co- accused Roopsingh is stated to have informed the complainant that Kamlesh owns certain swathes of lands, which he is interested to sell. After that, the complainant alongwith Roopsingh and Kamlesh went and saw the land and decided to buy the land at the cost of Rs. 49 lacs per bigha. As an advance, he stated to have paid Rs. 25 lacs to Kamlesh and thereafter, the complainant says that there was no action taken by the accused persons to complete the deal and handover the property to him and register the same. Repeated entities by him,

were met with evasive answers from Kamlesh and Roopsingh. However, in his Court statement, the same complainant removes the name of Kamlesh and states that co-accused Roopsingh came alongwith the appellant herein and met the complainant and tried to sell the land which was shown as that of Kamlesh, after which the complainant is stated to have made the advance payment of Rs. 25 lacs to Kamlesh. Thereafter, he discovered that land is of someone else.

The case of the appellant is that he was never named by the complainant in the first document prepared and given by him to the police, which is Ex. P/2- the complaint. Further he says that his name has been taken for the first time in the FIR and thereafter, his name has been mentioned in the Court testimony.

Learned counsel for the State while opposing the application for grant of suspension has read out from the relevant portion of the judgment, wherein, the Court has culled out from the statement of PW/2-Purushhottam, where he says that he had mentioned the name of the appellant Murari in his complaint to the Police which is Ex. P/2 but that the persons who was writing down the complaint, may have erroneously left out the name of Murari.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this is against the evidence on record and refers to the statement of PW/2 with specific reference to paragraph No. 11 of the cross-examination, where to a suggestion, the complainant says that it is correct to suggest that he did not give the name of appellant - Murari in Ex. P/2.

Under the circumstances, there is, prima facie, a strong doubt whether the appellant was involved in the said offence, therefore, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the application (I.A. No.3157/2023) is allowed and jail sentence of appellant-Murari is hereby suspended. It is directed that the he shall be enlarged on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

Record of the trial court is received.

List this case in due course.

C.C. as per rules.

(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE

JPS/-

JAI PRAKASH Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecdf179cec865c7633f4cfb9e3

SOLANKI 8ce14fcbb05b9522a, pseudonym=560BC50AD082B9BE54EE290EC8CB2193780D8357, serialNumber=8D6BC1C9FCE36623D0BD6B8072A2D8C01433EB D48AE4F609F108CA8F8DE6B522, cn=JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 2023.03.17 16:41:23 +05'30'

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter