Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mahesh Chandra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 May, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 6999 of 2023
(MAHESH CHANDRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 29-05-2023
Shri Yogesh Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri P.S.Raghuvanshi, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.9447of 2023, which is the first application under Section
389 (1) of Cr.P.C seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on
behalf of sole appellant- Mahesh Chandra.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 411 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for period of six months with a fine of Rs.5,000/- with
default stipulations vide judgment o f conviction and order of sentence dated
15.05.2023 by Special Judge (MPDVPK Act), Shivpuri, District Shivpuri
(M.P.) in SC DOCT No. 400014/2012.
Present appellant has so far undergone incarceration of about 41 days
including the period suffered during trial.
A s per prosecution story, on 17.9.2011, complainant Vijay Gupta had
lodged the report before the Police Station - Kolaras, District Shivpuri stating
that he is the owner of the truck bearing registration No. MP 09 HF 9880 and
almost from two months Ashok son of Ramdas Dhobi is the driver and Jalwe
s/o Sarman Raikwar is the cleaner of the said truck. On 13.9.2011, the truck
after loading sugar from two places was going from Indore to Jhansi, but the
truck could not reach the destination. Complainant tried his best to contact the
driver as well as cleaner of the aforesaid truck, but the mobiles phone of driver
and cleaner were switched off. Complainant has doubt that goods and truck
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VISHAL
UPADHYAY
Signing time: 5/30/2023
11:20:50 AM
have sold by the driver and cleaner of the aforesaid truck or somebody else.
The Trial Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence placed on record
convicted and sentenced present appellant as referred above.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that appellant is innocent
and has falsely been implicated. The Trial Court did not appreciate the relevant
piece of evidence. The judgment is based on surmises and conjectures. Hence,
prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the
application supporting the impugned judgment and prays for dismissal of the
present application.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, regard being had to the fact that present appellant has suffered
incarceration of about 41 days and looking to the fact that the present appeal is
of the year 2023 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal, in the
obtaining facts and circumstances, appellant is held entitled for suspension of
jail sentence.
Accordingly, we allow IA No.9447 of 2023 and it is directed that the jail
sentence of appellant-Mahesh Chandra shall remain suspended during
pendency of present appeal and he be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject
to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant is directed
to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 10.07.2023 and on other
subsequent dates as may be fixed.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VISHAL
UPADHYAY
Signing time: 5/30/2023
11:20:50 AM
Accordingly, the IA stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA)
V. JUDGE
Vishal
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VISHAL
UPADHYAY
Signing time: 5/30/2023
11:20:50 AM
