Madhya Pradesh High Court
Tarun @ Ajju Raikwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2024
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 15066 of 2023
(TARUN @ AJJU RAIKWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 07-02-2024
Shri L.N. Sakle - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri S.K. Kashyap - Government Advocate for the State.
Heard on I.A. No. 28646 of 2023, an application under Section 389(1)
of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant - Tarun
@ Ajju Raikwar arising out of judgment dated 21.09.2022 delivered in
S.C.ATR No.86/2019 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST), Khandwa (MP).
The appellant has been convicted under Sections 302/34 and 324/34 (two
counts) of the I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC ST and sentenced to
undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for three years with fine
of Rs.500/- (on each count) and Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-
respectively, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for appellant while pressing the application for
suspension of sentence of appellant submits that as per prosecution version the
incident is said to have occurred when there was procession of immersion of
Durga idol. The complainant along with his friends including the deceased
Manish were going for immersion and were sitting on a vehicle on which music
system was installed. The deceased started dancing in front of vehicle. The
present appellant and co-accused persons are also stated to be dancing in the
same procession for immersion of Durga idol. The prosecution version further
alleges that there was altercation between the deceased and accused persons on
the allegation that the deceased has pushed some of the co-accused persons
while dancing. The co-accused is alleged to have assaulted the deceased with
knife.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per prosecution version
there is no previous enmity between the accused persons and the deceased. The
incident is stated to have occurred on sudden impulse on spur of moment
without any prior preparation. Even if prosecution version is accepted in
entirety, no case of culpable homicide amounting to murder is made out. It is
further submitted that the present appellant has already undergone 4 years 4
months of actual jail sentence. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near
future. Thus, remaining jail sentence of the present appellant may be
suspended.
Learned Government Counsel for the State opposed the prayer on the
basis of objection.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop but without commenting any
conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant.
Accordingly, I.A. No.28646 of 2023 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed
that the appellant-Tarun @ Ajju Raikwar 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,
District Khandwa o n 24.04.2024 and also on such further 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
MISHRA
