Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dhaniram Kumhar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 May, 2023
Author: Anjuli Palo
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 6884 of 2022
(DHANIRAM KUMHAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 08-05-2023
Shri Amit Kumar Soni - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Pankaj Raj - Panel Lawyer for the respondent - State.
Heard on I.A. No.5842 of 2023 - which is second application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of the appellant. The first application
I.A. No.15009 of 2020 was dismissed vide order dated 23.09.2022 on merits.
The appellant has been convicted by the trial Court under Sections 409 (on 5
counts) read with 120B, 420/120B, 467 (on 4 counts) read with 120B, 468 (on 4
counts) read with 120B, 471 (on 4 counts) read with 120B, 472 (on 4 counts) read
with 120B and 474 (on 4 counts) read with 120B, 477-A and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.10000/- (on each count), R.I. for 5 years with fine
of Rs.5000/-, R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.10000/- (on each count), R.I. for 5
years with fine of Rs.5000/- (on each count), R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.2000/-
(on each count), R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.2000/- (on each count) and R.I. for
2 years with fine of Rs.2000/- (on each count) and R.I. for 5 years with fine of
Rs.5000/-, respectively with default stipulations.
As per the case of the prosecution, the appellant being an employee of Post
Office misappropriated the amount along with other co-accused persons entrusted
by various persons for depositing in their Saving Account of Post Office during the
period August, 2012 to November, 2012 thereby committed criminal breach of trust,
Signature Not Verified
SAN
cheating and forgery by preparing a forged deposit slip.
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2023.05.09 16:50:18 IST
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the trial Court has not
properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record. The FIR has
been lodged with an inordinate delay. Trial Court has failed to appreciate that
during the period in question the appellant was not posted at Post Office Chachai.
He had joined on 22.5.2012. The appellant is not a beneficiary in this case. He has
not received any amount. The appellant is in custody and disposal of this appeal
would take considerable time, therefore, their jail sentence may be suspended.
Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties. There are ample evidence
available on record to show that the appellant was involved in perpetration of
offence along with other co-accused persons.
That apart, the role of the present appellant has been discussed by the trial
Court in paragraph 46 of the impugned judgment. The application preferred by the
appellant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 23.09.2022. This Court
does not find any change in circumstances. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to
suspend the jail sentence of the appellant and to release him on bail at this stage.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 5842 of 2023 is dismissed.
List for final hearing in due course.
(SMT. ANJULI PALO)
JUDGE
ks
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Date: 2023.05.09 16:50:18 IST
