Ravishankar @ Ranu Bhargav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 3792 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ravishankar @ Ranu Bhargav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2024

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                                 1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT GWALIOR
                                                        CRA No. 1620 of 2024
                                 (RAVISHANKAR @ RANU BHARGAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 08-02-2024
                                  Mr. G.M. Soni, Advocate for the appellants.

                                  Mr. Kalpana Singh Parmar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent - State.

Heard on I.A.No. 2194 of 2024, first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellants with an alternative prayer for grant of temporary bail as record has not been received.

The appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 of

Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.12.2023 passed by Sessions Judge, Datia District Datia (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 33/2022, whereby appellants have been convicted and sentenced under sections 323/34 with maximum sentence of four months each with maximum fine of Rs.500/- each with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the Court below has wrongly appreciated the evidence and convicted the appellants. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. It is further argued that the appellants were on bail during trial and

they did not misuse the liberty so granted. This criminal appeal is likely to take long time to come up for final hearing and appellants have hope and believe that they would succeed, therefore, prayed to suspend the jail sentence of the appellants till record is received.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the application and prayed for rejection of the same.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties,

without commenting on merits of the case, it is directed that subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellants shall remain temporarily suspended for a period of two months from today and he be released on bail.

List the case on 11.03.2024.

Meanwhile, Registry is directed to call the record of the Court below. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for compliance.

Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

(LJ*)