Madhya Pradesh High Court
Priyanka Shrivasatava vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 2 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1602 of 2024
(PRIYANKA SHRIVASATAVA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION)
Dated : 02-02-2024
Shri Abhishek Parashar - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ravi Chodhary - Advocate for respondent/CBI.
Heard on IA. No. 2169 of 2024, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of sole
appellant-Priyanka Shrivastava.
Appellant stood convicted under Sections 419 r/w 120-B of IPC and
sentenced to undergo 03 years' RI with fine of Rs.1000/-, Section 467 r/w 120-
B of IPC and sentenced to undergo 03 years' RI with fine of Rs.5000/-, Section
468 r/w 120-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo 03 years' RI with fine of
Rs.1000/-, Section 471 r/w 120-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo 03 years'
RI with fine of Rs.5000/- and Section 3(d)/4 of M.P. Recognized Examination
Act, 1937 r/w Section 120-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo 01 year RI with
fine of Rs.100/- vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
24.01.2024 passed by Special Judge CBI and XII Additional Sessions Judge,
Gwalior in S.T. No.1800241/2015.
Allegations against the present appellant Priyanka Shrivastava is that One
Swati Singh had appeared in her place as impersonator in P.M.T. Examination-
2010 conducted by the VYAPAM, Bhopal. On the basis of aforesaid, FIR was
lodged against the present appellant and later on, case was transferred to CBI.
Upon completion of the investigation, the case was committed for trial to the
Sessions Court. The Sessions Court upon due appreciation of the evidence
placed on record convicted and sentenced the present appellant as aforesaid.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is
innocent and has falsely been roped in the present case. Appellant has no
criminal antecedents. The trial Court has already suspended jail sentence of the
appellant upto 23.02.2024. More so, the appeal is of the year 2024 and there is
no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal. Under such circumstances, learned
counsel prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Learned counsel for respondent/CBI supporting the judgment impugned
submits that complicity of the appellant/candidate is writ large as apparently
with her knowledge and consent, the impersonated person had taken P.M.T.
Examination conducted by VYAPM in the year 2010 on her behalf. The
allegations against the appellant have been established beyond reasonable doubt
based on cogent evidence placed on record, hence, no exception can be taken
in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contention touching merits of the matter, but
regard being had to the fact that jail sentence of the appellant has already been
suspended by the trial Court upto 23.02.2024 and she has no criminal
antecedent, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, jail sentence of the
appellant deserves to be suspended during pendency of the present appeal.
Accordingly, it is directed that the jail sentence of the appellant 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.3,00,000/-
(Rupees Three Lac only) with two solvent sureties of Rs.1,50,000/- each
to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. She is directed to appear before the
Registry of this Court first on 06.05.2024 and on other subsequent dates as
may be fixed in this behalf.
Accordingly, IA. No.2169 of 2024 stands allowed and closed.
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.
(ROHIT ARYA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
ojha
