Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pappu @ Ravi Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 November, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 13013 of 2023
(PAPPU @ RAVI AHIRWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-11-2023
Shri Vibhor Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Purushottam Tanwar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.19023 of 2023, first application under Section
389(1) Cr. P.C. moved on behalf of appellant - Pappi @ Ravi Sikarwar
seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 363 of IPC r/w Section 11/13
of MPDVPK Act and sentenced to undergo five years RI with fine of
Rs.2,000/- and under Section 343 of IPC and sentenced to undergo six months
RI with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 03.10.2023 passed by Special Judge (MPDVPK
Act), Datia in SST No.300020/2016.
As per the report received from the office of Superintendent, District Jail,
Datia, appellant Pappi @ Ravi Ahirwar has already undergone imprisonment for
three year and nine months.
Learned Counsel for appellant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in
the application, submits the impugned judgment passed by learned trial Court is
based on assumption, conjectures and surmises. The learned Trial Court has
committed an error in convicting and sentencing the present appellant without
appreciating the prosecution evidence properly. There are material
contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. It is further
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 23-11-2023
10:14:26 AM
2
submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the
liberty so granted to him. Fine amount has already been deposited by the
appellant. There is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in the near future.
On these premised submissions, learned counsel prays that the execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged
on bail during pendency of the instant appeal.
Per contra, learned counsel for respondent- State opposes the
application and prays for its rejection.
Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties, regard being had to the
long custody of the appellant, but without commenting upon rival contentions
touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that application deserves
to be allowed. It is, accordingly, directed that the execution of remaining jail
sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal
and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum
o f Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court first on 22.12.2023 and on further dates as may be fixed
by the Registry in this regard till final disposal of the instant appeal.
Accordingly, aforesaid IA stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Vijay
