Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chhotu@Sawalsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2024
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 5441 of 2017
(CHHOTU@SAWALSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 07-02-2024
Shri Surendra Tuteja - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Gaurav Singh Chouhan - Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondents State.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant on I.A. No. 9152 of 2023, a
repeat (third ) application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for suspension of custodial sentence of appellant-Chotu @ Sawal
Singh.
The appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Sections
302, 302/120-B, 201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
of life, 3 years R.I with fine and usual default stipulation by Additional Sessions
Judge, District Khategaon, vide judgment dated 27/10/2017 passed in S.T.
No.87/2014.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is in
custody since 21.12.2013 (more than ten years). Learned counsel for the
appellant has further submitted that other co-accused persons have been given
the benefit of bail and, therefore, on the ground of parity the substantial jail
sentence of the appellant be suspended and be released on bail. There is no eye
witnesses of the incident and the case of the prosecution is based upon the
circumstantial evidence.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application, contending that the
deceased sustained 45 injuries which has been caused by sharp cutting object.
Although there is no eye witnesses of the incident, however, on the basis of
disclosure statement of the appellant a knife and blood stained clothes of the
present appellant are seized in which the human blood was found. The appellant
was in regular touch with the deceased on mobile and the same sim was
recovered from the appellant on his instance, which was found in broken
condition. It indicates that the appellant has tried to destroy the evidence,
therefore, there are sufficient evidence available on record to establish the guilty
of the appellant in the present crime. Hence, on the ground of parity the
appellant is not entitled to be released. Prior to this application, two applications
filed by the appellant under Section 389 (1) has been dismissed. There are no
changed circumstances, hence this application filed by the appellant be
dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
As per the record, the first application of the appellant filed under
Section 389 (1) of the CrPC was dismissed as withdrawn on 30.07.2018 and
the second application was dismissed on 05.04.2019 on merit. From the
perusal of the impugned judgment it is apparent that the appellant was in regular
touch with the deceased on mobile and the same sim was recovered from the
appellant on his instance, which was found in broken condition. Not only this,
as per the postmortem report the deceased sustained 45 injuries which has
been caused by sharp cutting object. The knife and blood stained clothes of
the present appellant are seized in which the human blood was found.
After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the
parties and looking to the evidence available on record and the involvement of
the appellant in the present crime, this Court is of the view that no case is made
out for suspension of jail sentence of appellant.
Accordingly, I.A No.9152 of 2023 is hereby dismissed.
Looking to the fact that appellant is in jail since more than 10 years,
hence, it is a fit case for final hearing. Therefore, list this case for final hearing
before the DB-II in the next week.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
rashmi
