Madhya Pradesh High Court
Halke vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 4478 of 2018
(HALKE AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-02-2024
Shri Deependra Raghuvanshi - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Rajesh Shukla- Additional Advocate General for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.2908 of 2024, second repeat application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.1- Halke. His earlier application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 22.09.2023
(IA.No.11472 of 2023).
Present appellant stood convicted under Sections 302/149, 450/149, 148
and 323/149 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of
Rs.5,000/-, RI for ten years with a fine of Rs.3,000/-, RI for one year with a fine
of Rs.500/-, RI for one month with a fine of Rs.100/- default stipulations vide
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.05.2018 passed by I
Additional Sessions Judge, Ashok Nagar (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.04 of
2014.
The present appellant so far has undergone actual jail sentence of 08
years, 10 months and 18 days a s per information dated 04.02.2024 received
from the office of Superintendent, Central Jail, Gwalior (M.P.) and brought on
record by learned counsel for the appellants.
As per prosecution story, complainant Guddibai along with her injured
husband- Kripan Singh Yadav, on tractor-trolley, son Golu and nephews Rajpal
and Indrajeet reported to the Police Station Isagarh to the effect that she was the
resident of village Gahora Tagar. Her house is situated in front of the house of
Chunnilal Dheemar. On 24.09.2023 at about 10 pm altercation took place
between Chunnilal and his son Devicharan who used to visit her house. On this,
Halke Kewat, Pramod Kewat, Bhanu Kewat, Kalla Kewat and Chunnilal Kewat
weilding deadly weapons like Lathi and Ballam came, started hurling abuses and
accosted her husband for accompaniment of Devicharan. When she and her
husband restricted them from hurling abuses, accused persons entered their
house and got her husband to the outside of the house. Halke and Pramod with
an intention to cause death inflicted Ballam (made of iron) blow to her husband
and Chunnilal, Bhanu and Kalla inflicted lathi (stick) blows to her husband.
When she (complainant) rushed to his rescue, Bhanu and Kalla inflicted lathi
(stick) blows to her. When she screamed, Kallu Lodhi, Kalla Chidar, Rajpal and
Indrajeet came there and to whom having seen approaching, accused persons
fled away therefrom extending threat of dire consequences. On the basis of
such information, FIR was registered. Investigation was set in motion. During
treatment, deceased Kripan Singh succumbed to the injuries sustained by him.
Upon completion of investigation including recording of statements, collection
of evidence and necessary formalities, challan was filed before the CJM, Ashok
Nagar (M.P.) from where the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The
Sessions Court on appreciation of evidence placed on record convicted and
sentenced the present appellant.
Learned counsel for appellants while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the Sessions Court
has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. The
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. Present appellant has falsely
been implicated in the instant case. No specific overt act has been attributed to
the present appellant. That apart, similarly placed co-accused/appellant No.2-
Pramod has already been extended benefit of suspension of sentence by this
Court vid e order dated 06.02.2024; therefore, he seeks parity. It is further
submitted that present appellant has so far undergone incarceration of 08 years,
10 months and 18 days. It is further submitted that the appeal being of 2018 is
not likely to be decided in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel
submits that the present appellant may be extended the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing on behalf of
the respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence, in which the
deceased sustained as many as 16 injuries on different parts of the body leading
to his homicidal death, found proved against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court is not
inclined to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
present appellant on merits, however, regard being had to the fact that similarly
situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail and the appeal which is
of the year 2018 is not likely to be decided in the near future, we are of the view
that present appellant is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.2908 of 2024 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of present appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of
the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to verification of the
factum of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
Appellant No.1- Halke is directed to appear before the Registry of this
Court first on 20.05.2024 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this
behalf.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and disposed of.
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.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ROHIT ARYA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
ojha
