Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajkumari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 August, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-2871-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 2871 of 2022
(RAJKUMARI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 08-08-2024
Shri Brajesh Kumar Rajak, Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Aditya Narayan Gupta - Government Advocate for the State of
M.P.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State submits that he adopts his
previous objection filed against I.A. No. 7368 of 2022.
Let a copy of the same be served to learned counsel for the appellants.
It is pointed out by learned counsel for appellants that Shri Anil
Mourya, Inspector and Station House Officer, Beena, District Sagar, who
recorded statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in case
Crime No.338/2019, has not put date on any of the typed written statements
under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Two of them have been exhibited as Ex.D/1 &
Ex.D/2.
This is a serious lapse on the part of the Inspector.
Let Inspector General Sagar explain that as to whether Inspector was
entitled to record statements without putting date on which such statements
were recorded.
Let affidavit be filed by the Inspector General and proposed action
taken be also informed that what action he proposes to take, because prima
facie it appears that Shri Anil Mourya is not fit to act as an Investigating
2 CRA-2871-2022
Officer.
Affidavit of the Inspector General be filed within two days to be
placed by the Registry in the chamter.
A copy of this order shall be communicated by Shri Aditya Narayan
Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
Heard on I.A.No.8140/2024, an application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C., for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.2
Kumkum D/o Manohar Lal Ahirwar and appellant No.3 Muskan D/o
Manohar Lal Ahirwar aged about 23 years and 21 years, respectively.
This appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is filed being aggrieved of
the judgment dated 07.02.2022, passed by learned First Additional Sessions
Judge, Bina, District Sagar (M.P.), in S.T.No.50/2019, whereby, appellant
No.2 & 3 Kumkum and Muskan, respectively, stand convicted for offence
under Section 302/34 of IPC for which they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for
life and fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulation each.
It is submitted that these appellants are innocent. They have been
falsely implicated. As per the FIR Ex.P/44 and 'Dehati Nalishi' Ex.P/10,
names of Kumkum and Muskan are not mentioned in the 'Dehati Nalishi'.
On the basis of 'Dehati Nalishi' FIR is lodged which is Ex.P/44, in which
name of the assaillants are mentioned as Manohar Ahirwar S/o Ganesh
Prasad Ahirwar, Prashant Ahirwar, S/o Manohar Ahirwar and Praveen
Ahirwar S/o Manohar Ahirwar. In the FIR, which was recorded by the eye
witness Rajni, there is no mention of presence or involvement of Kumkum
or Muskan. They are innocent. In statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C.,
3 CRA-2871-2022
recorded by the police, Rajni has narrated that later on gunshots were fired
after the Rajkumari, Muskan and Kumkum armed with hockey and sticks
had come and beaten Manoj, Sanjeev and Rajkumari.
It is admitted by Shri Aditya Narayan Gupta, Public Prosecutor, that
there are no hockey, sticks or lathi injuries on the body of Sanjeev, Manoj or
Rajkumari. It is, thus, evident that this is a case of overt and false implicated
of present appellants Kumkum and Muskan. Complainant as well as the
accused persons are members of the same extended family. Admittedly,
there was a dispute in regard to property which resulted in instant firing and
death of five persons. The main overt act is attributable to Praveen, Prashant
and Manohar.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for appellants that learned trial
Judge has not appreciated the facts and evidence of the case in proper
manner and in his over enthusiasm has wrongly convicted present
appellants. It is submitted that appellants Kumkum and Muskan remained in
custody from 25.06.2019 to 02.11.2019 and from the date of judgment till
this date. Hence, prayer is made to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the
appellants and release him on bail.
Shri Aditya Narayan Gupta, learned Govt. Advocate opposes the
prayer of the appellants.
Taking these facts into consideration, fact of incarceration and other
circumstances, it is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/-
4 CRA-2871-2022
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each, with two solvent sureties each, in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before
the Trial Court on 20.12.2024 and such other dates as may be fixed by the
Trial Court, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence imposed
upon appellant No.2 Kumkum and appellant No.3 Muskan shall remain
suspended and they shall be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A.No.8140/2024, is allowed & disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
List this case on 13.08.2024.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
A.Praj.
