Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Guddi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 August, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-1570-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1570 of 2022
(SMT. GUDDI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 01-08-2024
Shri Anil Kumar Mishra with Ms. Harshita Mishra, learned counsel
for the appellant.
Dr. Anjali Gyanani, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.15418/2024, first application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No. 3 - Smt. Jamvanti.
Present appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- with default
stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
29.1.2022 passed passed in Sessions Trial No.70/2021 by Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Dabra, Gwalior.
A Dehati Nalsi Ex.P/2 got registered by injured Pushpa on 23.2.2021
that appellants No. 1 to 3, namely, Guddi, Smt. Sunita and Smt. Jamvanti
respectively assaulted her and thereafter set her ablaze. After recording the
Dehati Nalishi, Dying Declaration was recorded by Executive Magistrate and
Naib Tehsildar. On the basis of which, FIR was registered at Crime
No.48/2021 at Police Station Bhitarwar, District Gwalior for offence under
Section 307/34 of IPC against these three appellants. During treatment, she
died on 9.3.2021 due to septic shock due to the burn injury. Accordingly,
Section 302 of IPC was also added. The prosecution examined PW-1
2 CRA-1570-2022
husband of the deceased, PW-4 and PW-7, both the sons of the deceased
who have not made any allegations in their examination-in-chief against the
appellants. According to them, they heard the screaming voice of Pushpa and
when they reached there, saw that she was burning and PW-1 was pouring
out water. As per dying declaration she was burnt by petrol but there is no
such FSL report that any injury was caused by petrol. Petrol is not normally
available in the house. Prosecution has not established that as to where they
procured petrol with intention to kill the deceased. In cross-examination PW-
7 admitted that there was a property dispute amongst them. That apart, the
appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no likelihood of early hearing of the
appeal in the near future. Hence, appellant No. 3 prays for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor while supporting the judgment
impugned, submits that the dying declaration is liable to be accepted as it is
read with Dehati Nalishi.
The Apex Court in the catena of decisions has held that dying
declaration alone cannot be the sole basis for conviction unless it is not
corroborated by the evidence.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court is not
inclined to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
the present appellant on merits, however, regard being had to the fact that
present appellant so far has already suffered incarceration of more than more
than 10 years and nine months of incarceration without remission, coupled
with the fact that the appeal is pending since 2022 is not likely to be decided
3 CRA-1570-2022
in the near future, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, present appellant
is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.15418/2024, stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of appellant No.3 - Smt. Jamvanti shall remain suspended
during pendency of the present appeal and she shall be released on bail
subject to verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on her
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac
only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Trial Court subject to verification of factum regarding deposit of fine
amount. Present appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this
Court first on 12/11/2024 and thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may
be fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Abhi
