Madhya Pradesh High Court
Santosh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 May, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 4357 of 2023
(SANTOSH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 09-05-2023
Shri Rishiraj Trivedi - Advocate for the appellant.
Smt. Varsha Singh Thakur - GA for respondent/State.
Record of the court below has been received.
Heard on admission.
Appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A.No.5876 of 2023, which is an application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant-Santosh for grant of bail and
suspension of remaining jail sentence.
Appellant stands convicted vide judgment dated 10/03/2023 passed in
S.T.No.300014/2016 by I Additional Sessions Judge, West Nimar,
Mandleshwar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 420/34, 467/34, 468/34 and
471/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been sentenced to undergo 4 years
RI with fine of Rs.5,000/-, 3 years R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/-, 3 years R.I. with
fine of Rs.5,000/- and 2 years R.I. with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively, with
usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is an innocent
person. He is a 65 years old person and suffering jail incarceration since
10.3.2023 i.e. from the date of judgment passed by the trial Court. During the
trial he was remained in custody from 20.9.2015 to 3.11.2015 and for rest of the
period he was remained on bail and did not misuse the liberty given to him. Trial
Signature Notcourt
Verifiedhas failed to appreciate the material contradictions and omissions in the
Signed by: TRILOK SINGH
SAVNER
statement of the witnesses. Co-accused Rikkhiram's application under Section
Signing time: 10-May-23
11:15:10 AM
389(1) of Cr.P.C. has been allowed by this Court vide order dated 20.4.2023
passed in CRA No.4412/2023 in the similar circumstances. As per the judgment
of the trial Court, case of both the accused persons is similar. There is a strong
case in favour of the appellant. Final conclusion of appeal will take a long
sufficient time. Hence he prays for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail
sentence of the appellant.
Per contra, learned GA for the respondent/State opposes the application
for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection.
Considered the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made
by learned counsel for both the parties and nature and gravity of the allegation
against the appellant. From perusal of the handwriting expert's report (Ex.P/45
& P/46) it appears that although signature of the appellant Santosh has been
found on certain documents but the handwriting expert did not gave any report
that the accused/appellant Santosh signed as Prabha Bai on certain documents.
On the same set of evidence, co-accused Prabha Bai and Badshah have been
acquitted by the trial Court. Final conclusion of this appeal will take a long
sufficient time. In view of the above, I deem it proper to suspend the remaining
jail sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No.5876 of 2023 is allowed and the execution of
remaining jail sentence of the appellant-Santosh is hereby suspended till the final
disposal of this appeal and it is ordered that the appellant be released on bail on
his depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, and upon furnishing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.75,000/- with one solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with a further direction to appear
Signature Not Verified
before the Registry of this Court on 1.11.2023 and on such other dates, as
Signed by: TRILOK SINGH
SAVNER
Signing time: 10-May-23
11:15:10 AM
may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard during the pendency of
this appeal.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
trilok
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TRILOK SINGH
SAVNER
Signing time: 10-May-23
11:15:10 AM
