Arman @ Bade vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 17111 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                       CRA No. 2159 of 2013
                                              (ARMAN @ BADE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 13-10-2023
                                 Shri Prasanna Namdeo - Advocate for appellant.

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

Heard on I.A. No.20369 of 2023.

2. This is the sixth application seeking for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant - Arman @ Bade, who has been convicted

under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R. I. for life and fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation as mentioned in the impugned judgment.

3. The first and second applications were dismissed on merit vide orders dated 11.02.2015 and 24.11.2017. The third bail application was dismissed on the ground of no changed circumstance vide order dated 13.09.2019. The fourth and fifth applications were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 07.01.2022 and 13.01.2023. We do not find any changed circumstance that warrants reconsideration of the case. However, learned counsel for the appellant placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated

05.10.2021 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.4633 of 2021 (Saudan Singh vs. The State of U.P. and others) submits that in view of the custody period, the accused may be released on bail. That he is in custody for a period of more than 14 years. The period of custody is not disputed by the State counsel.

4. However, the case of the prosecution is that the accused has committed the murder of an eight year old child. The father of the child is the eye-witness. In view of the brutal manner in which the child has been done to death by the appellant, the case of the accused falls within the exceptions as carved out by Signature Not Verified Signed by: LORETTA RAJ Signing time: 10/17/2023 9:38:43 AM

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Saudan Singh (supra). Therefore, the period of custody has no relevance. Hence, we find no good ground to enlarge the appellant on bail.

5. I.A. No.20369 of 2023 is accordingly rejected.

                                     (RAVI MALIMATH)                              (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                       CHIEF JUSTICE                                   JUDGE

                           Loretta




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LORETTA RAJ
Signing time: 10/17/2023
9:38:43 AM