Madhya Pradesh High Court
Karu @ Jitesh Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. on 25 September, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 765 of 2015
(KARU @ JITESH MISHRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.)
Dated : 25-09-2023
Shri A.K. Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.K. Nirankari - Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Shri M.L. Yadav - Advocate for the complainant.
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave of this Court
to withdraw I.A. No.4050 of 2023, seventh repeat application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the sole appellant.
Prayer allowed.
Accordingly, I.A. No.4050 of 2023 is dismissed as withdrawn.
Learned counsel for the appellant pressed for I.A. No.13012 of 2020,
sixth repeat application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the
appellant - Karu @ Jitesh Mishra for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
His fifth application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 31-01-2020
with liberty to revive the prayer after suffering some further reasonable period of
custody.
Present appellant stands convicted under Section 302 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.50,000/- and Section
27(1) of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo 03 years' RI with fine of
Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations respectively vid e judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 07-07-2015 passed by Forth Additional Sessions
Judge, Bhind in Sessions Trial No.250/2010.
Present appellant so far has undergone incarceration of 15 years
approximately including the period of remission.
Prosecution story as found proved is that on 25-04-2010, while nephew
of complainant Sudama Lal Mishra Rajesh was putting fodder in his house,
complainant Sudamalal and his elder brother Ramavtar Mishra came and sit
there, then appellant/ accused Jeetesh @ Karu alongwith another boy armed
with pistol came there and due to previous animosity with intention to kill
Rajesh, Jeetesh @ Karu fired gun-shot which hit him on the back and blood
started oozing out and thereafter other boy fired gun-shot which hit on right side
of waist of Rajesh and blood started oozing out and thereafter both of them fled
away from the spot. On the basis of aforesaid, FIR was registered. After
completion of investigation, challan was filed. Case was committed to the
Sessions Court for trial. The Sessions Court upon critical evaluation of
evidence placed on record convicted and sentenced the present appellant as
referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the impugned
judgment is based on surmises and conjectures and suffers from vice of
perversity. Besides, appellant has so far undergone incarceration of 12 years
and 01 month 22 days without remission and 15 years approximately with
remission. The appeal is of the year 2015 and there is no likelihood of early
hearing of the appeal in the near future. Hence, learned counsel prays for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant primarily on the
ground of long jail incarceration.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State and learned
counsel for the complainant while supporting the impugned judgment opposed
the application with submission that the Sessions Court upon critical evaluation
of the evidence placed before it has convicted and sentenced the appellant as
referred above hence, no 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 but regard being had to the fact that present appellant has suffered long
incarceration for approximately 15 years including the period of remission, the
appeal is of the year 2015 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the
appeal and in the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant is
held entitled for suspension of jail sentence.
Accordingly, I.A. No.13012 of 2020, i s hereby allowed and it is
directed that the jail sentence of the appellant 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) (ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2023.09.26
10:40:41
+05'30'
