Madhya Pradesh High Court
K P @ Krashnapal Kansana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 September, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 11248 of 2023
(K P @ KRASHNAPAL KANSANA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 25-09-2023
Shri Rajmani Bansal- Advocate for appellants.
Shri Rohit Shrivastava- Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.16229 of 2023 first application under Section
389(1) Cr. P.C. moved on behalf of the appellants No.1- K.P alias Krishnapal
Kasana and appellant No.2 Banti Gurjar seeking suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
Learned counsel for appellants requests that the application with regard
to appellant No.1 K.P alias Krishnapal Kasana may be treated as withdrawn and
application with reference to appellant No.2 Banti Gurjar may be heard.
Accordingly, IA No.16229 of 2023 so far as it relates to K.P alias
Krishnapal Kasana stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Appellant No.2 Banti Gujrar stands convicted under Section 393 of IPC
read with Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act and sentenced to undergo three years
RI with fine of Rs.3,000/- and two-two years RI with fine of Rs.2,000-2,000/-
under Section 332/34 of IPC (on two counts) with default stipulations vide
judgment of conviction and sentence dated 26-08-2023 passed by Special
Judge (MPDVPK Act), Morena in Special Case No.166 of 2015.
Learned Counsel for appellants submits that learned Trial Court has
committed an error in convicting and sentencing present appellant without
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 26-09-2023
10:37:10 PM
appreciating prosecution evidence properly. There are material contradictions
and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. The appellant was on bail during
trial for a period of one month i.e. from 08-01-2014 to 04-02-2014 and he did
not misuse the liberty so granted to him. Fine amount has already been
deposited by appellant. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near
future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that execution of remaining jail
sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent- State opposes the
application and submits that there is one previous case pending against
appellant Banti Gurjar.
In reply, learned counsel for the appellants submits that in that case,
appellant Banti was released on anticipatory bail vide order dated 23rd of
September, 2022 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC
No.44659 of 2022. The appellant on bail during trial and his sentence has been
suspended by trial Court under Section 389 (3) of Cr.P.C.
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.2 Banti Gurjar shall remain
suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail
subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of Trial Court and also subject to deposit of the fine amount (if not already
deposited) for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 23.11.2023
and on further dates as may be directed by the Registry in that regard.
Accordingly, aforementioned I.A. so far as it relates to appellant no.2
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 26-09-2023
10:37:10 PM
Banti Gurjar stands allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 26-09-2023
10:37:10 PM
