Rupesh @ Roopsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 15026 MP

                                                              1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                        CRA No. 7516 of 2023
                                          (RUPESH @ ROOPSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 12-09-2023
                                Shri Vinay Kumar Sharma - Advocate for appellant.

                                Smt. Seema Jaiswal - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Record of the Court below is available. Heard on I.A. No.20163/2023, application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay.

For the reasons stated in the application, I.A. No.20163/2023 stands allowed and disposed of. Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

Heard on admission.

This appeal is admitted for final hearing. Also heard on I.A.No.18255/2023 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 the offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years and fine of

Rs.5,000/-, with default stipulation.

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 maximum jail sentence of appellant is three years. The appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him and the appeal would take considerable time to conclude. He is ready to furnish adequate Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA HIMANSHU SHARMA Signing time: 9/14/2023 2:48:10 PM

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 prays for its rejection.

Heard learned 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 ground that the appellant is not having fit mental state and for this the statements of Santosh Kumar (PW2) have been relied upon, but the admission made by

this witness does not reveal the medical status of mental health of appellant. No documents relating to the mental illness of appellant were filed before the trial Court nor any plea was taken that on account of mental illness the appellant should be exempted from trial.

The prosecution case regarding injury caused to the complainant is well supported by the statements of complainant Mahendra Singh (PW4), eyewitness Bhujbal Singh (PW3) and Rajendra Singh (PW5). Even Santosh Kumar (PW2) has supported the prosecution case. Further the medical evidence given by Dr. Aditya Raghuwanshi (PW1), Dr. Sahrish Khan (PW7) and Dr. Ashish Kumar Gupta (PW8) have supported the prosecution case beyond doubt.

In the light of these facts, this Court does not find that any case for suspension of sentence is made out. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

List the case for final hearing in due course.

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA HIMANSHU SHARMA Signing time: 9/14/2023 2:48:10 PM

JUDGE rv

Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA HIMANSHU SHARMA Signing time: 9/14/2023 2:48:10 PM