Bhajanlal Oad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 18436 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                      CRA No. 12348 of 2023
                                        (BHAJANLAL OAD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 02-11-2023
                                 Mr. Arun Kumar Paterya - Advocate for the appellant.

                                 Mr. Rajendra Singh Yadav - Public Prosecutor for respondent/ State.

Admit Heard on I.A. No. 18140 of 2023, which is first application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant.

This Criminal Appeal assails the judgment dated 11.09.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Atrocities) Act, District Sheopur in SCATR/15/2020, whereby appellant has been convicted under Sections 420/120-B of IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of four years, four years and four years with fine of Rs.5,000/-, Rs.5,000/- and Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the trial Court has wrongly been convicted the appellants without proper appreciation of facts of the case as well as evidence available on record. Further submission is that

during the investigation data of seized mobile, pen drive and laptop have not been recovered. The statements of persons for being victimize have not been recorded, that fact is mentioned in para 40 of the judgment of the trial Court. Further submission is that neither documents have been collected from Union Bank of India and Kenra Bank nor the statement of bank officers were recorded. Learned trial court observed at para 40 that prosecution has failed to prove that accused persons were committed forgery, however, appellants were Signature Not Verified Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN Signing time: 11/3/2023 9:55:30 AM

committed under Section 420 of IPC only on presumption because identification of appellant was not conducted and after investigation for the first time complainant has identified the appellants from the photo affixed in arrest memo. It is further submitted that the appellant has already served incarceration more than six months out of total jail awarded. The present criminal appeal is likely to take long time to conclude. Hence, prayed to suspend the jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

Counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available

on record.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without commenting on merits of the case, I.A. No. 18140 of 2023 is hereby allowed subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and they be released on bail. The appellant is further directed to mark his appearance before the Office of this Court o n 20/12/2023 and on subsequent dates given by the Office in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.

List the case for final hearing in due course. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for compliance.

Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN Signing time: 11/3/2023 9:55:30 AM

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

(LJ*)

Signature Not Verified Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN Signing time: 11/3/2023 9:55:30 AM