Santosh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 16994 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                         CRA No. 2856 of 2015
                                                (SANTOSH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 12-10-2023
                                 Shri Manish Mishra - Advocate for appellant.

                                 Shri A.S. Baghel - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.21146 of 2023.

This is the fourth application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of appellant. Earlier bail application was dismissed as not pressed

by this court vide order dated 20.09.2021. He has been convicted under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation as mentioned in the impugned judgment.

2. This repeat bail application has been filed on the ground that the appellant has remained in custody for a considerable period. Looking to the evidence available on record there is every possibility of acquittal of the appellant. There is virtually no eyewitness of the incident. The allegation against the present appellant is that he has caught hold of the deceased and other persons have inflicted injuries. He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may

be imposed by this Court while considering the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has vehemently opposed the application stating that there was an oral dying declaration recorded in the matter. He also submits that the offence has been committed in a brutal manner. The appellant and the other co-accused have assaulted the deceased. The allegation against the present appellant is that he caught hold of the deceased and the other accused - Ashok inflicted injuries by means of an Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHALINI LANDGE Signing time: 10/16/2023 4:55:45 PM

axe. His both hands and legs were amputated, as a result of injuries. The family members tried to stop the fight but they have been inflicted injuries by the present appellant. Mere custody period cannot be the ground for enlarging the appellant on bail, looking to the manner in which the offence has been committed. Therefore, the custody period will be of no help to the appellant and the case falls under the exceptions which have been carved out 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). He has prayed for dismissal of the application.

4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the brutal

manner in which the offence has been committed, no case for grant of bail is made out.

5. Accordingly, the application (I.A.No.21146 of 2023) is hereby rejected.

                                 (RAVI MALIMATH)                                     (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                   CHIEF JUSTICE                                          JUDGE

                           Sha




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHALINI
LANDGE
Signing time: 10/16/2023
4:55:45 PM