Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shivkumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 May, 2023
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 62 of 2023
(SHIVKUMAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 09-05-2023
Shri Anand Mohan Khare, counsel for the appellants.
Smt. Ranjana Agnihotri, Dy. G.A for the respondent/State.
Trial court record has been received.
Heard on admission.
Record of the trial Court is perused.
Prima facie, this case seems to be arguable. Hence, admitted for
final hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No.38/2023, an application under Section 389 (1)
of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to appellants
No.2-Ramsujan, appellant No.3 Ramkumar and appellant No.3 Smt.
Panbai. Appellants along with one Shivkumar have been convicted for
commission of offence under Section 307,307/34 of IPC. They have been
sentenced to undergo 10-10 years R.I and fine of Rs.5000-5000/-with
default stipulation vide judgment dated 28/12/2022 passed by Fifth Addl.
Sessions Judge Katni in ST No.1900231/2015 (State of M.P. Vs.
Shivkumar and others).
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have
b e e n erroneously convicted for commission of offence under section
307/34 of IPC. The trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence of
witnesses as contradictions and omissions appeared in their evidence have
not been considered. It is further submitted that F.I.R was lodged by
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANOJ KUMAR
LALWANI
Signing time: 5/10/2023
11:56:34 AM
injured Parsadi same day and in it he has specifically stated that it was
Shivkumar only who had given axe blows on his person causing grievous
injury. There is no mention about presence of other accused on spot. No
overt act is attributed on their part. It is further submitted that later-on
injured with the advice of others improved the prosecution story and
arrayed other accused by manufacturing false story stating that present
appellants had caught hold him. It is submitted that appellants have fair
chance to succeed in appeal. They are not main accused. Therefore it is
prayed that aforesaid appellants be released on bail.
O n the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-State has
opposed the prayer for grant of bail.
I have gone through the F.I.R and evidence of PW-1 (Parsadi Patel)
and medical evidence of P.W.8 (Dr.R.K.Athya) and P.W.9 (Dr. Sunil
Parashar) and other material on record. Having considered all the facts
and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a case in which appellant
No.2-Ramsujan, appellant No.3-Ramkumar and appellant No.4-Panbai may
be released on bail suspending their jail sentence. Accordingly I.A.
No.38/2023 is allowe d a n d execution of jail sentence of appellant
No.2-Ramsujan, appellant No.3-Ramkumar and appellant No.4-Panbai is
hereby suspended subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited. It is directed that the appellant No.2 Ramsujan, appellant
No.3-Ramkumar and appellant No.4-Panbai be released on bail on each
of their furnishing a personal bond to a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANOJ KUMAR
LALWANI
Signing time: 5/10/2023
11:56:34 AM
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the
trial Court on 27/07/2023 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by
that Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
MKL
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANOJ KUMAR
LALWANI
Signing time: 5/10/2023
11:56:34 AM
