Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rinku Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 October, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 12771 of 2023
(RINKU GURJAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 26-10-2023
Shri Sarang Gupta- Advocate for appellants.
Shri Nirmal Sharma - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Record of the trial Court has already been received.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on IA No.18660 of 2023, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the appellant No.1- Rinku Gurjar and appellant
No.2- Ballu Gurjar seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Appellants stand convicted under Section 147 of IPC with fine of
Rs.500/-, one year RI with fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 323 of IPC and
three years RI with fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 332 of IPC with default
stipulations vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29th of September,
2023 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Morena (M.P.) in ST No.
200 of 2017.
Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned judgment
passed by learned Trial Court is based on assumption, conjecture and surmises.
The learned Trial Court has committed an error in convicting and sentencing the
present appellants without appreciating the prosecution evidence properly.
There are material contractions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses.
During trial, appellant No.1 Rinku Gurjar has already undergone the jail custody
of three months fourteen days and appellant No.2 Ballu has already undergone
the jail custody of six months ten days. The appellants were on bail during trial
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 27-10-2023
11:53:04 PM
and they did not misuse the liberty so granted to them. Fine amount has already
been deposited by the appellants. The jail sentence of appellants was already
suspended by learned Trial Court, under Section 389(3) of the Cr.P.C. There is
no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. On these grounds, learned
Counsel prays that execution of remaining jail sentence of appellants may be
suspended and they may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for State opposes the application and prays
for its rejection.
Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties but without commenting
upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that
application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant No.1- Rinku Gurjar and appellant
No.2- Ballu Gurjar shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal
and they shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum
o f Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) e a c h with one solvent
surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court and also
subject to deposit of the fine amount (if not already deposited) for their
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 18.12.2023 and on further
dates as may be directed by the Registry in that regard.
Accordingly, I.A. No.18660 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 27-10-2023
11:53:04 PM
