Vinod vs State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 17555 MP

                                                                1
                                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                         AT JABALPUR
                                                        CRA No. 9812 of 2019
                                                    (VINOD Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 19-10-2023
                                  Shri Shreyas Pandit - Advocate for appellant.

                                  Ms. Hemlata Kshatriya - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A No.4878/2023, which is fourth application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the appellant.

T h e appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 394 r/w 397 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years with a fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He also submits that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record and committed error in convicting the appellant for aforesaid offence. The appeal would take considerable time to conclude. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and conditions, which may be

imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the application for suspension of sentence may be considered.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned respective counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and record of the court below.

This application for suspension of sentence has been argued on the basis of parity. It has been claimed that co-convicted placed in similar circumstances Signature Not Verified Signed by: POONAM MANEKAR Signing time: 10/20/2023 4:25:58 PM

was granted the benefit of suspension of sentence in Cr.A. No.11031/2019. It has been argued that in the impugned judgment learned trial Court in paragraph No.55 has observed that the facts relating to two convicts are identical. The only difference between the facts related to these two persons is that a mobile phone was seized from the possession of appellant claiming that it was looted in the incident, but the identity of that mobile phone was not established through any T.I.P. or evidence.

Having heard the arguments and on perusal of record as well as applying the principle of parity, this Court is of the considered opinion that till disposal of this appeal, execution of jail sentences awarded to the appellant under the

impugned judgment deserve to be suspended. Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, this application is allowed.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before the trial Court concerned on 20.12.2023 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, the aforesaid I.A. stands allowed and disposed of. List this case for final hearing in due course.

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE pnm

Signature Not Verified Signed by: POONAM MANEKAR Signing time: 10/20/2023 4:25:58 PM