Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay @ Kalu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 November, 2023
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 3226 of 2023
(AJAY @ KALU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 21-11-2023
Shri Nilesh Dave, counsel for the appellant.
Shri K. K. Tiwari, Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Matter is taken up for hearing, hence I.A.No. 9035/2023 for urgent
hearing stands disposed of.
Heard on I.A.No. 9036/2023 which is first application under Section
389(1) of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on
behalf of appellant-Ajay @ Kalu.
Appellant stands convicted vide judgment dated 24.01.2023 passed by
the Special Judge (Atrocities) Act, District Badwani in Special (Atrocities) Case
No. 08/2022 for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code
and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default
stipulation.
The prosecution case found to be proved is that on 25.11.2021, between
12:45 - 02:00 in the afternoon near the house of Bhagwan Romde at village
Morgun Rajpur, with the intention and knowledge, appellant committed murder
of deceased Roshni who belongs to scheduled caste, by strangulating her with
dupatta (stawl). Police received merg intimation from Government Hospital
Rajpur that deceased Roshni has been brought in dead condition after which
merg report was prepared and statement of the witnesses were recorded.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been
falsely implicated in the case. There is no eye-witness or last seen witness to
the incident nor any material evidence has been recovered from the possession
of the appellant. Appellant had no motive to commit murder of the deceased.
The entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and the
chain of circumstances is neither complete nor proved against the appellant.
Appeal is of the year 2023 and its final disposal will take considerable time.
Hence, it is prayed that the substantive jail sentence of the appellant be
suspended and he be released on bail.
Per contra, learned Government Advocate for the State opposes the
prayer and submits that the Aadhar Card of the appellant and black & yellow
beads of mangalsutra of the deceased has been recovered from the place of
incident. Further, witness Mangilal (PW-2) and Sumanbai (PW-4) have duly
stated that while searching for deceased Roshni, they saw the appellant running
from the place of incident. Hence, the application deserves to be dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence
and the custody period of the appellant which is about 2 years, at this stage we
are not inclined to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant and release him on
bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No. 9036/2023 stands rejected.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
vidya
