Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gyan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 October, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1201 of 2014
(GYAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-10-2023
Shri A.K. Jain - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Rajesh Shukla - Additional Advocate General for the respondent-
State.
Heard on I.A.No.14734 of 2023, fifth repeat application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.2-Ranveer Singh. His earlier application (IA.No.14630/2022) has
been dismissed as withdrawn.
Appellant No.2-Ranveer Singh stood convicted under Section 302/34 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.50,000/-
with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
18-11-2014 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind (M.P.) in
Sessions Trial No.181/2012.
Appellant No.2-Ranveer Singh so far has undergone 11 years and 08
months incarceration as evident from the judgment impugned.
The case of the prosecution as found proved is that injured (later
deceased Munnalal) on 01.12.2011 got reduced in writing the Dehati Nalisi to
the effect that he was a mason and after performance of work at the site i.e.
village Mungaoli (Dr.Sirnam) was returning home. In the midst, Ranveer and
Gyan Singh met him on the Imaliya culvert in front of the shop of Munshi at
about 06:00 in the evening. Ranveer was wielding 315 bore gun. Both asked him
to consume liquor. When he denied for the same, on exhortation made by Gyan
Singh, Ranveeer with an intention to cause his death fired gunshot which hit
below his navel and passed through left hip. On the basis of such Dehati Nalisi
(Ex.P-15), FIR at Crime No.320/2011 was registered at Police Station
Mehgaon, District Bhind and the investigation was set in motion. Upon
completion of investigation including recording of statements, collection of
evidence and necessary formalities, challan was filed before the competent
court of criminal jurisdiction, from where the case was committed to the
Sessions Court. The Sessions Court on appreciation of evidence placed on
record convicted and sentenced the present appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellants while taking exception to the
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that present
appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The impugned judgment
is based on surmises and conjectures and suffers from vice of perversity. Even
if the case of the prosecution is accepted in its entirety then also at the most
offence punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC may be made out. Besides,
present appellant so far has undergone incarceration of 11 years, 8 months. The
appeal is of the year 2014 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the
appeal in the near future. Hence, learned counsel prays for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to present appellant primarily on the ground of long
jail incarceration.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail
looking to the nature and the gravity of offence.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court is not
inclined to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
present appellant on merits, however, regard being had to the only fact that
appellant No.2-Ranveer Singh so far has undergone incarceration of 11 years, 8
months coupled with the fact that the appeal is pending since 2014 and is not
likely to be decided in the near future, we are of the view that appellant No.2-
Ranveer Singh is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.14734 of 2023 stands allowed and it is directed
that the jail sentence of appellant No.2- Ranveer Singh s hall remain
suspended during pendency of the instant appeal and he shall be released on
bail subject to verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on
his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two
Lacs only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine amount.
Appellant No.2 - Ranveer Singh is directed to appear before the Registry
of this Court first on 14/12/2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be
fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2023.10.13 18:21:46
+05'30'
