Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ram Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 October, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4803 of 2017
(RAM SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 25-10-2023
Shri Pradeep Kumar Naveriya - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for the State.
He a r d on I.A.No.25033/2023, which is the third application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under Section 389(1) of the
Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant -2 Raama @ Rama Lodhi.
The first application filed on behalf of appellant-2 Raama was dismissed
as withdrawn on 06.08.2018 and second application was dismissed on merits
on 19.11.2020.
The appellant No.2 has been convicted by the trial Court under Sections
302/149 and 148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and R.I. for 1
year with fine of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively with default stipulation,
vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 13.10.2017 passed by 6th
Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Sessions Trial No.199/2015.
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant by taking this Court to the
prosecution story submits that the role allegedly played by the appellant No.2 is
similar to that of co-accused/appellant No.4-Purshottam. This Court by order
dtd. 04.10.2023 in the instant case suspended the remaining jail sentence of the
appellant No.4. The present appellant is similarly situated and therefore, by
applying the principles of parity, the remaining jail sentence of appellant No.2
may also be suspended.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SWETA SAHU
Signing time: 10/26/2023
5:16:47 PM
This Court while granting benefit of suspension to co-accused-
Purshottam, recorded as under:
"The appellant 4 has been convicted by the trial Court under
Sections 302/149 and 148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for life and R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.5,000/- and
Rs.1,000/- respectively with default stipulation, vide judgment
of conviction and sentence dated 13.10.2017 passed by 6th
Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Sessions Trial
No.199/2015.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant No.4 has falsely been implicated in commission of
alleged offence. This appellant has not used any dangerous
weapon in the alleged incident. He further submitted that
appellant was armed with lathi at the time of incident and the
deceased Raghvendra had died due to cumulative injuries. The
multiple persons caused multiple injuries on the deceased.
There was no motive or intention of this appellant to commit
murder of the deceased. The appellant has not caused any
grievous injuries which may cause death of the deceased. He
further submits that this Court vide order dated 06.08.2018 has
granted the benefit of bail to the co-accused/appellant no.3
Lallu, therefore, on the basis of parity also appellant 4 is
entitled for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. In
addition he submits that during trial the appellant was on bail
and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. The appellant
is in custody since the date of judgment i.e. 13/10/2017 i.e.
near about 6 years. This Appeal is of the year 2017 and is not
likely to come up for hearing in near future. Under these
circumstances learned counsel prays for suspension of
remaining jail sentence of the appellant.
Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer for suspension of remaining jail sentence of
the appellant and submits that looking to the nature of
allegations and evidence, the appellant no.4 is not entitled for
suspension of remaining jail sentence. Hence, prays for
dismissal of the application.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SWETA SAHU
Signing time: 10/26/2023
5:16:47 PM
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and
perused the record.
Considering the above factual matrix of the case, including
overall evidence available on record including the period of
custody coupled with the fact that the appellant 4 is at present
aged about 60 years and hearing of this appeal is not possible
in near future, without expressing any opinion on merits of the
case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence
of appellant 4 Purshottam. Accordingly, I.A.No.6679/2023 is
allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already
deposited), the remaining jail sentence of appellant 4 is hereby
suspended and it is directed that appellant 4 Purshotam be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
with a further direction to appear before the trial Court, Sagar
on 18/12/2023 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by
the trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this
appeal."
In view of principles of parity, so also looking to the period of custody,
which is about 6 years and three months, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of appellant No.2 on same terms.
Accordingly, I.A. No.25033/2023 is allowed. Subject to depositing the
fine amount (if not already deposited), the remaining jail sentence of the
appellant No.2 is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellant No.2-Raama
@ Rama Lodhi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for 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 with a further direction to
remain present before the concerned Trial Court, on 04 th December, 2023
and on such other dates as fixed by the trial court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SWETA SAHU
Signing time: 10/26/2023
5:16:47 PM
List for final hearing in due course.
C.C as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
ss
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SWETA SAHU
Signing time: 10/26/2023
5:16:47 PM
