Seetaram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 16363 MP

                                                             1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 2690 of 2017
                                               (SEETARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 05-10-2023
                                Shri Paresh Pareek - Advocate for appellant.

                                Shri Yogesh Dhande - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No.14291 of 2023.

2. This is the first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant - Seetaram who has been convicted under Section 302 of

the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.05.2017 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Begumganj, District Raisen in S.T. No.343 of 2012.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.09.2012 at about 12 noon the accused inflicted injuries by means of an axe on his wife Kusumbai. The incident was seen by his daughter Abhilasha (PW/1) and Roop Singh (PW/9).

4. This application has been filed on the ground that the applicant has remained in custody for almost 11 years. The incident has taken place all of a

sudden. There was no pre-intention of causing death. Placing reliance on the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2021 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.4633 of 2021 (Saudan Singh vs. The State of U.P. and others) learned counsel for the appellant submits that as the appellant has completed more than 10 years' jail sentence his application should be considered for grant of suspension of sentence and bail.

5. Although the State counsel has opposed the application pointing out that there is a recovery of blood stained axe from the possession of the present Signature Not Verified Signed by: LORETTA RAJ Signing time: 10/7/2023 10:39:08 AM

appellant and also the clothes which were seized from the possession of the appellant were blood stained, but he could not dispute the fact that the incident has taken place all of a sudden.

6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the case of the appellant does not fall within the exception carved out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh (supra) coupled with the custody period of the appellant, we deem it just and necessary to enlarge him on bail. Consequently, the application (I.A. No.14291 of 2023) filed by accused/appellant is allowed.

7. Accused/appellant - Seetaram is directed to be enlarged on bail subject to

deposit of the fine amount and on he furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court/concerned Court on 04.01.2024 and thereafter on such other subsequent dates as may be fixed in that behalf.

                                    (RAVI MALIMATH)                                  (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                      CHIEF JUSTICE                                       JUDGE

                          Loretta




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LORETTA RAJ
Signing time: 10/7/2023
10:39:08 AM