Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balveer Banjara vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 September, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 5815 of 2021
(BALVEER BANJARA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 23-09-2023
Smt. Uma Kushwah - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri S.S. Kushwah - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No. 16458 of 2023, first application under Section 389(1)
of CrPC, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant- Balbir Banjara.
Present appellant Balbir Banjara stands convicted under Section 364-A of
IPC read with Sections 11, 13 of MPDVPK Act and sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 30.07.2021 passed by Special Judge
(MPDVPK Act), Shivpuri (M.P.) in Special Sessions Case No.400012/2015.
Present appellant so far has undergone incarceration of seven years.
As per prosecution story, a missing report No. 03/14 was lodged with
description of facts as mentioned in para 3 of the impugned judgment.
Thereafter, on further investigation it was found that abductees Tulsiram and
Jaipal Khalko were abducted by unknown persons. Accordingly, Crime No.
51/2014 was registered vide Ex.P/55. Tulsiram and Jaipal Khalko were
recovered and Panchnamas to that effect were prepared vide Ex. P/13 and Ex.
P/4, respectively. After recording of statements of the abductees and other
witnesses and collection of incriminating material, challan was filed. Case was
committed for trial to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court upon critical
evaluation of evidence placed on record convicted and sentenced the present
appellant along with other co-accused persons as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment submits that the ingredients of Section 364-A are not fulfilled in the
instant case as there is no evidence related to demand from a person other than
the abductee as ransom for release of the abductees. On a mere statement of
abductee Jaipal Khalko that for demand of ransom he and Tulsiram were
abducted, the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 364-A of
IPC and sentenced as mentioned above. It is further submitted by learned
counsel that co-accused Mohru @ Moharpal Banjara has been extended the
benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail in Criminal Appeal No.6466
of 2021 vide order dated 01.09.2023 and the case of the present appellant is
akin to that of the co-accused Mohru @ Moharpal Banjara. The appeal is of the
year 2021 and there is no likelihood of early disposal of the appeal in near
future. Hence, he prays for suspension of sentence.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State supporting
the judgment impugned opposed the application with submission that it is a
case of abduction for demand as found proved by the Sessions Court, hence
n o exception can be taken in the context of suspension of jail sentence and
grant of bail to the appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, regard being had to the fact that present appellant has suffered
incarceration for approximately seven years, co-accused Mohru @ Moharpal
Banjara has been extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail in Criminal Appeal No.6466 of 2021 vide order dated 01.09.2023, the
appeal is of the year 2021 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the
appeal, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, appellant- Balbir Banjara is
held entitled for suspension of jail sentence.
Accordingly, I.A.No. 16458 of 2023 is hereby allowed and it is
directed that the jail sentence of appellant-Balbir Banjara shall remain suspended
and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with one solvent surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and also subject to deposit of the
fine amount (if not already deposited). The appellant is directed to mark his
appearance before the Registry of this Court first on 29/11/2023 and on other
subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.As. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules
(ROHIT ARYA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2023.09.25
10:52:52 +05'30'
