Madhya Pradesh High Court
Daulat Singh Gujar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 February, 2024
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 910 of 2020
(DAULAT SINGH GUJAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 01-02-2024
Mrs. Durgesh Gupta - Advocate for appellant No.4 Ramakant Singh.
Shri A. N. Gupta - Government Advocate for the respondent-State.
Heard on I. A. No.28986 of 2023, an application filed under Section
389(1) of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant
No.4 Ramakant Singh arising out of judgment dated 11/12/2019 delivered in
S.T. No.62/2016 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Pipariya District
Hoshangabad (MP).
The appellant no.4 has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine
of Rs.1000/-, Section 307/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 14
years with fine of Rs.500/-, Section 326/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.500/-, Section 325/149 of IPC and sentenced
to undergo R.I. for three years with fine of Rs.three years with fine of Rs.500/-,
Section 148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of
Rs.500/- and Section 323/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six
months with fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for this appellant submits that as per prosecution story,
appellant allegedly caused injury by means of a lathi. Considering similar role
of co-accused Chhotu @ Chhotelal (appellant No.5), this Court suspended the
remaining jail sentence on 05/12/2023. Thus, on the ground of parity, this
appellant may also be given similar treatment.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Advocate but did not
dispute the factum of parity.
This Court in order dated 05/12/2023 recorded as under :-
"Also heard on I.A. No.23195/2022 an application under
Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail to appellant No 5Ghhotu @ Chhotelal
arising out of judgment dated 11.12.2019 delivered in
Special S.T. No.62/2016 passed by 1st Additional
Session Judge, Pipariya District Hoshangabad.
The appellant No. 5 has been convicted and sentenced
for the offence punishable under Section 302/149 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Life Imprisonment
with fine of Rs. 1000/-, Section 307/149 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 14 years with fine of Rs.
500/-, Section 326/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs. 500/-, Section 325/149
of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with
fine of Rs. 500/-, Section 148 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs. 500/- and
Section 323/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for 6 months with fine of Rs. 500/- with default
stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in post
mortem of deceased Brajesh, cause of death is injury
No.1 caused by some sharp object while the appellant
has been allegedly armed with lathi. He further submitted
that counter case was also instituted on the report of the
appellant's side. In para 62 of the impugned judgment
dated 11.12.2019, referring document Ex. D/5 to D/9, he
further submits that appellant's side also sustained
injuries. As per learned counsel, the incident has taken
place as free fight between both the parties. Appellant is
in custody for more than five years. Learned counsel for
the appellant placed reliance the para 14 on the judgment
of Pathubha Govindji Rathod and another Vs. State
of Gujarat, (2015) 4 SCC 363. Final hearing of this
appeal is not possible in near future. Thus, remaining jail
sentence of appellant No.5 may be suspended.
Learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer of
learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that in
counter case, the accused persons have been acquitted
of the charges but he did not dispute the custody period
of the appellant and therefore, he prays for dismissal the
suspension application of appellant No. 5.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and
perused the record.
Considering the factual backdrop and period of actual
custody coupled with the fact that final hearing of this
appeal is not possible in near future, we deem it proper to
suspend the remaining jail sentence of appellant No.5.
Accordingly, I.A. No.23195/2022 is allowed."
Considering the principle of parity, without expressing any conclusive
opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining
jail sentence of appellant no.4.
Accordingly, I.A. No.28986 of 2023 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant no.4 is hereby suspended and it is
directed that appellant No.4 Ramakant Singh be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court with a further direction to appear before the trial Court,
Pipariya District Hoshangabad on 11/03/2024 and also on such other dates
as may be fixed by the trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this
appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (VIVEK JAIN)
JUDGE JUDGE
manju
