Madhya Pradesh High Court
Neeraj Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 May, 2023
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 10684 of 2022
(PURUSHOTTAM @ PAPPU PRAJAPATI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA/11287/2022
Dated : 11-05-2023
Shri Sharad Verma, counsel for the appellants in
Cr.A.No.10684/2022.
Ms. Shradha Tiwari, counsel for the appellant in
Cr.A.No.11287/2022.
Ms. Nalini Gurung - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.Nos.10149/2023 and I.A.No.22983/2022, applications
under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail
to the appellants pending the appeal.
2. The appellants have been convicted for commission of offence
under Section 307,307/149,148 and 147 of IPC and have been sentenced to
undergo 5-5 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2000/- for commission of offence under
Section 307,307/149, 2 years R.I. and fine of Rs. 800-800/- for commission of
offence under section 148 IPC and one year R.I. with fine of Rs.1000-1000/-
for commission of offence under section 147 of IPC with default stipulations
vide judgment dated 15.11.2022 passed in S.T.No.148/2020 (State of M.P. Vs.
Kushilal Prajapati and others) by IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Satna.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that appellants
have been erroneously convicted by the learned trial court, as it has not
properly appreciated the evidence of prosecution witnesses and various
contradictions and omissions appeared in their evidence. It is further submitted
that appellant Devendra Kushwaha has undergone jail sentence of almost two
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANOJ KUMAR
LALWANI
Signing time: 5/12/2023
11:25:37 AM
years and 04 months, appellant Purushottam @ Pappu Prajapati has undergone
almost three years of jail sentence while appellant Ankush Verma @ Guddu and
Neeraj Prajapati had already suffered incarceration for a period of five months
during trial and now they are in jail since last six months. Thus, they too have
completed sentence of almost 11 months in jail. During trial appellant Ankush
Verma and Neeraj Prajapati were on bail and have not misused the liberty
granted to them. The maximum sentence is five years and major part of the
sentence has already been undergone by the main accused/appellant Devendra
Kushwaha and Purushottam @ Pappu Prajapati. Appellants have fair chance to
succeed in appeal. Therefore, it has been prayed that their remaining jail
sentence may be suspended.
4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellants.
5. Having taken into consideration the custodial period of the
appellants Devendra Kushwaha, Purushottam @ Pappu Prajapati and two
others and the fact that there is no possibility of hearing of this appeal in near
future, I am of the view that a case for suspension of jail sentence is made out
and appellants may be released on bail. Consequently, I.A.Nos.10149/2023 and
I.A.No.22983/2022 are allowed.
6. The execution of jail sentence of appellants Purushottam @
Pappu Prajapati, Devendra Kushwaha, Ankush Verma @ Guddu and
Neeraj Prajapati is hereby suspended subject to depositing the fine amount, if
not already deposited. It is directed that the appellants be released on bail
on their furnishing a personal bond to a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the trial
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANOJ KUMAR
LALWANI
Signing time: 5/12/2023
11:25:37 AM
Court on 22.08.2023 and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by it 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: 5/12/2023
11:25:37 AM
