Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vijendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 November, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 111 of 2015
(VIJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 01-11-2023
Shri D.R.Sharma, learned counsel for appellant No.1 - Vijendra Singh.
Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Additional Advocate General for
respondent/State.
Heard o n IA No.18020 of 2023, second repeat application under
Section 389 (1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on
behalf of appellant No.1- Vijendra Singh.
The present appellant No.1 - Vijendra Singh has undergone incarceration
of 09 years and 01 months.
Appellant No.1 - Vijendra Singh stood convicted under Section 302/34
IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.1,000/-
with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
20.01.2015 passed by Special Judge [Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act], Datia (M.P.) in Special Sessions Trial
No.06/2012.
A s per prosecution story, on 26.11.2011 at about 8-9 pm prosecutrix
was informed at home that her son Rakesh was lying near the well at village
Sunari and her other son Rambabu was slapped by a boy of the village. Having
received such information, when prosecutrix reached the spot, she found that
her son Rakesh was lying thereat and some villagers were also present. At that
place, brother of Vijendra Rawat was also present who told that Rambabu had
been slapped. Prosecutrix came back leaving Rakesh, her son, as he was in the
habit of being with the boys of the village but she was in rage as her younger
son Rambabu was slapped. After sometime, prosecutrix with the help of
Chhote Jatav and a boy of Dheemer got her son Rakesh home. Rakesh was
feeling stomachache in the way but he kept mum and did not tell anything.
Rakesh remained at home entire night. The second day although Rambabu had
gone to fetch doctor from Goraghat yet the doctor was not available.
Thereafter, when Rambabu was escorting Rakesh to Goraghat for medical aid,
Rakesh died in the midst. Prosecutrix expressed that two months before also
her son Rakesh was assaulted by Vijendra Rawat and his sons and the report of
which was also got registered at police station and she had suspicion that her
son Rakesh was assaulted by the same persons. She also administered some
medication to her son Rakesh at home as he was complaining of stomachache.
Report of this incident was got reduced in writing by prosecutrix in shape of
Dehati Nalisi Ex.P-1, on basis of which Marg was registered and prosecution
was set in motion. During enquiry, as per the autopsy, deceased was found
have died due to injury in the liver and haemorrhage. On completion of Marg
enquiry, FIR was registered. Upon completion of investigation, recording of the
statements and other formalities, Challan was filed. The case was committed to
the Special Court for trial. The Special Court upon critical evaluation of the
evidence placed before it and recording of statements of material witnesses,
convicted and sentenced the present appellant No.1 Vijendra Singh as referred
above.
Learned counsel for the appellant No.1 submits that the present appellant
No.1 Vijendra Singh is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The Special
Court has not appreciated the evidence in correct perspective and the same
suffers from surmises and conjectures. Moreso, present appellant No.1
Vijendra Singh has already suffered incarceration of 09 years and 01 month.
Co-accused Ajay @ Bunty and Nablu Dheemeer have already been given the
benefit of suspension of sentence and enlarged on bail vide common order
dated 13.09.2023. The appeal is of the year 2015 and there is no likelihood of
early hearing of this appeal in near future. Under such circumstances, it is
prayed that jail sentence of the present appellants may be suspended.
Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposed the prayer and
supported the impugned judgment.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, but regard being had to the period of custody suffered by the present
appellant No.1 Vijendra singh i.e. 09 years and 01 month and that the appeal is
of the year 2015 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal and
looking to the fact that co-accused Ajay @ Bunty and Nablu Dheemer have
been extended the benefit of bail, this Court is of the considered view that
benefit of suspension of sentence may be extended to present appellants.
Accordingly, IA.No.18020/2023 stand allowed and it is directed that
jail sentence of appellant No.1 Vijendra Singh shall remain suspended during
pendency of the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to
verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. He is
directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on 20.12.2023 and
thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant IAs and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for
compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
AK/-
ANAND KUMAR
2023.11.01
16:25:49 +05'30'
