Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dharmendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 November, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 14583 of 2023
(DHARMENDRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 30-11-2023
Shri Sushil Goswami- Advocate for the appellant.
Shri R.K. Awasthi- Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on IA No.21361/2023, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant seeking suspension of sentence and grant
of bail.
Appellant stands convicted under Sections 457, 354, 323 of IPC and
Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and sentenced t o undergo three years' RI, three
years' RI, three months' RI, three years' RI with fine of Rs.2000/-, Rs.2000/-,
Rs.500/-, Rs.2000/- with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and
sentence dated 03.11.2023 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge
(POCSO), District Datia (M.P.) in Special Case No.07 of 2017.
Learned Counsel for appellant submits that independent witnesses
Devendra Gupta (PW-4) and Nand Kishore (PW-5) did not support the
prosecution. Learned trial Court did not consider the enmity between the parties
over property dispute. The impugned judgment passed by learned Trial Court is
based on assumption, conjecture 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 contractions
and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. 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. The jail sentence of appellant was
already suspended by learned Trial Court, under Section 389(3) of the Cr.P.C.
There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. On these grounds,
learned Counsel prays that execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant
may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent State opposed the
application and prayed for its rejection.
Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties 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 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 of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court and also subject to
deposit of the fine amount (if not already deposited) for his appearance before
the Registry of this Court on 22.12.2023 and on further dates as may be
directed by the Registry in that regard.
Accordingly, I.A. No.21361/2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Avi
