Rinki Bhadoria vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 17805 MP

                                    1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                              CRA No. 10152 of 2023
                  (RINKI BHADORIA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 26-10-2023
      Shri A. K. Dwivedi - Advocate for the appellant.

      Ms. Hemlata Kshatriya - Panel Lawyer for the State.

      Reserved on               : 20.10.2023
      Pronounced on             : 26.10.2023

      Arguments of both the counsel for the parties are heard at length.

      Judgment and record of the Court below perused.
                                  ORDER

Heard on admission.

The appeal being arguable is admitted for final hearing. Also heard on I.A No.19232/2023, which is first 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 an offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with a fine of

Rs.500/-, with default stipulation. The fine amount has already been deposited by the appellant (as mentioned in the application).

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the jail sentence of appellant was suspended by the trial court till 26.08.2023 as mentioned in the application. Thereafter, this court vide order dated 21.08.2023 has extended the period of bail of appellant from 26.08.2023 to 26.10.2023. The maximum jail sentence of appellant is of three years and he was on bail during trial and he did

not misuse the liberty granted to him and also 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 pray for its rejection.

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

This interim application, marked as I.A. No.19232/2023, has been argued

on the ground that appellant is the wife of complainant, who is on strained marital relationship with the complainant and with this vendetta the complainant lodged a false FIR.

It has been argued that the testimony of complainant has not been corroborated by any other evidence. Further, a report was lodged by the appellant against the complainant on the basis of which a criminal case has been registered against him and he is on bail. It is claimed that to put pressure on the appellant, this false complaint was lodged. It has also been argued that no blood-stained clothes were seized by the police during investigation.

Record shows that the complainant suffered several fractures on left parietal bone, which were extending to left temporal bone. These injuries were caused by hard and sharp object. Although appellant claims that she was falsely implicated in the case but this fact has not been established on the basis of cross-examination of complainant. Merely because the Investigating Officer failed to seize the blood-stained clothes, the statements of complainant cannot be discarded. There is no evidence on record to disclose the date of incident

regarding which the FIR was lodged by the appellant against the complainant, therefore, no assumption can be drawn that the present case was a counter-blast to that case.

Having considered the evidence available on record and also the nature of injury caused by a hard and sharp object to the complainant, this court finds no reason to suspend the execution of sentence passed against the appellant.

Hence, the application is dismissed.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE

ps

Digitally signed by PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Date: 2023.10.27 15:10:20 +05'30' Adobe Reader version: 11.0.8