Madhya Pradesh High Court
Samrath vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 May, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 6821 of 2023
(SAMRATH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-05-2023
Shri Ritu Raj Bhatnagar - Advocate for appellants.
Shri Santosh Singh Thakur - Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on IA.No.7351/2023, which is an application for urgent hearing
during summer vacation.
On due consideration, application is allowed and matter is taken up for
hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.7350/2023, which is first application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence on
behalf of the appellants No.1 to 4 namely Samrath, Prakash, Rahul and Chetna.
Appellants stand convicted vide judgment dated 02/05/2023 passed in ST
No.25/2018 by Additional Sessions Judge, Alot, District Ratlam (M.P.) and
appellant No.1 has been convicted under Sections 307 of the IPC and rest of
the appellants have been convicted under Section 307/34 of the IPC and have
been sentenced to under go 03 years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- each and
appellant No.4 has been convicted under Section 323 of the IPC and rest of the
appellants have been convicted under Section 323/34 of IPC and have been
sentenced to under go 06 months RI with fine of Rs.500/- each with usual
default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants are innocent
persons and they have been falsely implicated in this matter. During the trial
appellants were on bail and they have not misused the liberty granted to them.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/23/2023
11:57:26 AM
Their jail sentence has also been suspended by the trial Court till 02/06/2023.
Victim Kanhaiya and Sangeeta both have sustained simple injuries. There are
material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses.
Looking to old pendency of the cases for consideration, final conclusion of this
appeal would take sufficient long time. There is a strong case in favour of the
appellants. Hence, the execution of the remaining part of the jail sentence of the
appellant s 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 evidence, has convicted the
appellants, hence, their application for suspension of sentence is liable to be
dismissed.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the
allegation levelled against the appellants and also taking note of the fact that
appellants were on bail during the trial; there is no complaint that they have
misused the liberty granted to them; victim persons have sustained only simple
injuries and final conclusion of the appeal will also 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 appellants.
Accordingly, I.A.No.7350/2023 is allowed and it is directed subject to
deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and subject to furnishing
personal bond by the appellants in the sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy
Thousand Only) each with separate solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of learned trial Court, the execution of remaining custodial part of
the sentence of the appellants shall remain suspended, till final disposal of this
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/23/2023
11:57:26 AM
appeal.
The appellants after being enlarged on bail shall mark their presence
before the Registry of this Court on 01/12/2023 and on all such subsequent
dates, which are fixed in this behalf.
Let record of the trial Court be requisitioned.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
V. JUDGE
Tej
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/23/2023
11:57:26 AM
