Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abdul Kadir vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2024
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 8623 of 2022
(ABDUL KADIR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 08-02-2024
Shri Pradeep Singh Chouhan - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.N. Gupta - Government Advocate for the respondent-State of
M.P.
Heard on I.A.No. 24478 of 2022 which is first application under
Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
appellant No.2 - Samina @ Leela arising out of judgment dated 30.08.2022
delivered in Session Trial No.38/2020 passed by Second Additional Sessions
Judge, Bijawar District Chhatarpur.
The appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I for Life with fine of Rs.1000/- with default
stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant while pressing the application for
suspension of sentence of the appellant submits that appellant has now
undergone four years and three month of actual jail sentence. As per
prosecution version, the incident is said to have occurred when the present
appellant No.2 and other co-accused persons were cutting grass over some
land and at that time the deceased along with two other persons came and
objected to them cutting grass because as per the complainant party the land
was belonging to the complainant party. It is further submitted that this led to
quarrel and fight ensured in which the deceased injured and eventually died.
Learned counsel for the appellant No.2 further submits that appellant
No.2 is said to have assaulted the deceased by means of 'Hasiya' on the neck
of the deceased but there is no corresponding injury on the neck. He further
submits that incident occurred in heat of passion on the spur of moment
without any pre-meditation or preparation. Even if the prosecution version is
accepted in its entirety even then it would not be culpable homicide amounting
to murder. He stated that the appellant No.2 is a lady aged around 60 years.
There is no possibility of early hearing of this appeal in near future. Thus,
remaining jail sentence of the present appellant No.2 may be suspended.
The prayer is opposed by learned Government Counsel on the basis of
objection.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and the fact that the appellant
No.2 being a lady around 60 years of age, without expressing any conclusive
opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining
jail sentence of appellant.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 24478 of 2022 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant No.2 is hereby suspended and it is
directed that appellant No.2 - Samina @ Leela be released on bail on her
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,
Bijawar District Chhatarpur on 15.04.2024 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
Prar
