Mhd. Tarik Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 16615 MP

                                                               1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                       CRA No. 6370 of 2017
                                       (MHD. TARIK KHAN AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 09-10-2023
                                 Shri Surendra Verma - Advocate for appellants.

                                 Shri A.N. Gupta - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.19081 of 2023:

2. This is a repeat application seeking for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of accused-appellants No.1 & 2 namely Mohd. Tarik

Khan and Fatima Bee who have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.200/- each with default stipulations, as mentioned in the impugned judgment. Their earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 13.05.2022.

3. As per the prosecution story, on 24.03.2013 at about 4:00 AM, the accused persons with a common intention to cause death of one Rajni, poured kerosene on her body and lit her on fire. Due to which, she received 90% burn injuries and died. Investigation was commenced. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed. After trial, the appellant along with other

co-accused have been convicted and sentenced as indicated hereinabove.

4. This repeat application has been filed on the ground that other co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the case of the present appellants is similar to that of those co-accused, who have been enlarged on bail. They are in custody since 18.12.2017 and are ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while considering their application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has vehemently Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 10/12/2023 10:08:36 AM

opposed the application stating that the case of the present appellants is not similar to that of co-accused who have been enlarged on bail. They have been enlarged on bail as no overt act has been attributed to them. There is a dying declaration recorded in the case i.e. Ex.P/18, which clearly implicates the present appellants in commission of offence. It is specifically mentioned that the present appellants poured kerosene over her body and lit her on fire. Under these circumstances, no case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail is made out. He has prayed for dismissal of the application.

6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the active participation of the present appellants in commission of offence coupled with

the fact there is a dying declaration in the case, this Court does not deem it appropriate to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the present appellants and release them on bail.

7. I.A. No.19081 of 2023 is accordingly dismissed.

                                (RAVI MALIMATH)                                        (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                  CHIEF JUSTICE                                             JUDGE

                           sj




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHEEL
KUMAR JHARIYA
Signing time: 10/12/2023
10:08:36 AM