Mukesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 7555 MP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR CRA No. 6676 of 2019 (MUKESH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 09-05-2023 Mr. P.S. Chouhan - Advocate for appellants.

Mr. Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for State.

Heard on I.A No. 2283 of 2021, an application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellants namely Mukesh and Golu @ Pintya arising out of judgment dated 17.06.2019

delivered in S.T. No.35/2017 by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur, District-Burhanpur (M.P.).

The appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that it is a case of blind

murder. There is no eye-witness account in this matter and, therefore, the Court below has convicted the appellants on the basis of circumstantial evidence. The circumstances are reproduced in paragraph no.64 of the impugned judgment. It is submitted that the said circumstances noted by the Court below are either perverse or improper. The deceased was allegedly last seen with appellants by P.W-7, P.W-8 and P.W-9. These witnesses clearly stated that they made a statement after 20-25 days from the date of incident about last seen to the police. No plausible explanation was given for giving belated information to the Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 5/10/2023 12:24:31 PM

Police. Prakash Gadariya I.O. (P.W-24) deposed that he got information about the incident from Gyaneshwar on 27.02.2017. Gyaneshwar (P.W-14) declined that any such information was given by him to the I.O. However, I.O. in his cross-examination admitted that there exists no justifiable explanation as to why, no action was taken after gathering information from Gyaneshwar on 27.02.2017 till 20.03.2017. This creates serious doubt on the prosecution story. The clothes were seized on 22.03.2017 and were sent to F.S.L. on 09.04.2017. I.O. could not give any justifiable explanation for this delay nor any witness entered the witness box to establish that this incriminating material were in safe custody during this long period. Thus, the circumstance no.5 used against the

appellants is not trustworthy. So far the two mobile phones are concerned, paragraph no.29 of the impugned judgment shows that the Court below gave a finding that it could not be established beyond reasonable doubt that one such mobile was recovered from appellant Mukesh.

The Court below in paragraph no.78 of the impugned judgment expressed its displeasure and passed strictures against the I.O. relating to another phone (Article-B). Thus, chain of circumstance is not trustworthy and is incomplete. It is not safe to give stamp of approval to the conviction based on improper chain of events.

Learned Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the prayer on the basis of objection.

Considering the aforesaid arguments and without expressing any conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of appellants namely Mukesh and Golu @ Pintya. Accordingly, I.A No. 2783 of 2021 is allowed.

Signature Not Verified Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 5/10/2023 12:24:31 PM

remaining jail sentence of appellants namely Mukesh and Golu @ Pintya is hereby suspended and it is directed that the appellants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the trial Court, Burhanpur on 17th July, 2023 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

Certified copy as per rules.

                              (SUJOY PAUL)                                (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
                                 JUDGE                                             JUDGE

                          julie




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JULIE SINGH
Signing time: 5/10/2023
12:24:31 PM