Madhya Pradesh High Court
Indrajeet Singh @ Bindusingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 May, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 431 of 2016
(INDRAJEET SINGH @ BINDUSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 12-05-2023
Shri Sachin Parmar - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Amit Rawal - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on IA.No.6638/2023, which is an application for urgent hearing,
stands disposed off.
Heard on I.A.No.6637/2023, which is fifth application under Section 389
of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence on behalf
of the appellant Indrajeet Singh @ Bindusingh.
Appellant stands convicted vide judgment dated 20/02/2016 passed in
Sessions Trial No.80/2012 by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam (M.P.)
under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been sentenced to
undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is an innocent
person and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. He is pressing this
application only on the ground of period of custody since the appellant has
completed more than 12 years and 06 months jail incarceration. He has no
criminal past. This is an old appeal of the year 2016 and is not likely to be heard
finally in near future and it would take sufficient long time, therefore, in light of
the judgment of the apex Court in the case of Sudan Singh V/s. State of U.P.
[SLP (Crl.) No.4633/2021, decided on 05/10/2021, the jail sentence of appellant
is liable to be suspended. There are material contradictions and omissions in the
statement of the witnesses and there is a strong case in favour of the appellant.
Appellant is having a child and there is no one in the family to maintain the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/12/2023
7:04:29 PM
child. Hence, the execution of the remaining part of the jail sentence of the
appellant be suspended till the final disposal of this appeal.
P e r contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the
application for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection by submitting
that the trial Court after due appreciation of the evidence has convicted the
appellant, hence, his application for suspension of sentence is liable to be
rejected.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the
allegation levelled against the appellant and also taking note of the fact that
appellant has already suffered jail incarceration of more than 12 years and 06
months and final conclusion of the appeal will take sufficient long time. In view
of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper to
suspend the remaining custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No.6637/2023 is allowed and it is directed subject to
deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and subject to furnishing
personal bond by the appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of learned trial Court, the execution of remaining custodial part of the sentence
of the appellant shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.
The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before
the Registry of this Court on 04/12/2023 and on all such subsequent dates,
which are fixed in this behalf.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Tej
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/12/2023
7:04:29 PM
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/12/2023
7:04:29 PM
