Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajkumar Rajput vs The State Of M.P. on 12 May, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 800 of 2023
(RAJKUMAR RAJPUT Vs THE STATE OF M.P.)
Dated : 12-05-2023
Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra- Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Jitendra Singh Parihar - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Heard on I.A No.5836/2023 which is an application under Section
389(1) of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant
aris ing out of judgment dated 30.12.2022 delivered in Sessions Trial
No.400030/2016 by Additional Sessions Judge, Lavkush Nagar, District
Chhatarpur (M.P.)
The appellant was tried and convicted for the offences under Sections
307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years with fine of
Rs.5,000/-, under section 25(1-B)(A) of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.1,000 and under section 27 of Arms Act and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-. All the sentences
have been directed to run concurrently.
In addition to the grounds mentioned in the application for suspension of
sentence, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he remained on bail
during the trial and he is in jail since the date of judgment i.e. 30.12.2022 so he
has already undergone custody for almost three years.
Learned counsel submits that no case is made out. Prosecution has failed
to prove the offence under Section 307 of IPC for the reason that the eye
witnesses Ramlakhan and Shyam Kali did not support the version of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: APARNA TIWARI
Signing time: 5/13/2023
11:14:25 AM
prosecution. Another eye witness Rajbagh deposed that he has not seen the
appellant firing upon the injured. Learned counsel further submits that the
Medical Officer/Radiologist was not examined before the trial Court, therefore,
the nature of injury is not proved. Learned trial Court committed an error in para
31 of the judgment to hold appellant guilty merely on the basis of conjecture
and surmises that every injury caused by fire arm would be dangerous to life.
Therefore, the conviction under Section 307 of IPC for attempt to murder is not
sustainable. Final disposal of the appeal would take considerable time. Hence,
prayer has been made to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State for the respondent/State
opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail and submits
that the Medical Officer Dr. K.K. Sagariya (PW-9) has specifically reported fire
arm injury to the injured and fire arm has also been recovered at the instance of
appellant. Therefore, the alleged offence was duly proved.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment of the
trial Court.
The submission on behalf of appellant has substance. Considering the
aforesaid backdrops and without expressing any conclusive opinion on merits,
this Court deems it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the
appellant- Rajkumar Rajput Accordingly, I.A.No.5836/2023 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of appellant Rajkumar Rajput is hereby suspended
and it is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with
one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a
Signature Not Verified
further direction to appear before the concerned trial Court on 14th July,
Signed by: APARNA TIWARI
Signing time: 5/13/2023
11:14:25 AM
2023 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial Court in this
regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
AT
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: APARNA TIWARI
Signing time: 5/13/2023
11:14:25 AM
