Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raghvendra Kurmi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 5586 of 2023
(RAGHVENDRA KURMI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-02-2024
Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Shri Shubham Mishra -
Advocate for appellant.
Shri D.K. Parouha - Government Advocate for respondent-State.
Record of the Court below is received.
Heard on the question of admission.
Admit.
Also heard on I.A. No.8854/2023, which is an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned in the
impugned judgment dated 11.04.2023 passed by the Third Additional Sessions
Judge, Khurai District Sagar in S.T. No.24/2020.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the present case, even
as per the findings arrived at by the trial Court in paragraph 54 of the judgment,
it was not a case where the injuries were inflicted on a person of the deceased
with an intention to commit murder. It is contended by the counsel that as per
the prosecution story, it is evident that as there was a dispute regarding laying of
foundation on the land suddenly a fracas took place as a result of which,
present appellant according to prosecution inflicted injury on the head of the
deceased with the aid of axe (kuladhi) and later on, he expired. It is contended
by the counsel the trial Court has taken into consideration the judgement of
Apex Court in the case of Hari Shankar Shukla vs. Sate of U.P. in paragraph 55
and has also concluded that the case in hand stand on similar footing. It is
contended by the counsel that the Apex Court also in the aforesaid judgment
has reduced the sentence to 6 years. Thus, counsel submits that as in the
present case, the appellant has already suffered 3 years 3 months and 22 days in
custody deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prays
and submitted that as per paragraph 14, there were two injuries on the head of
the deceased, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence deserves to
be dismissed inasmuch as, the injuries caused by the present appellant with the
aid of axe resulted in death of the deceased.
Heard the rival submissions and perused the case diary.
It is evident from the prosecution story that as a result of a dispute on
account of laying of foundation on the land in question, sudden fracas took
place at the site of incident, where the present appellant inflicted injuries with the
aid of axe on the head of the deceased, later on the deceased expired. The trial
Court after sifting the entire evidence concluded in paragraph 53 that the injuries
were not caused with an intention to commit murder and has convicted the
present appellant under Section 304 Part - II of IPC and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for 10 years.
Thus, taking into consideration the findings arrived at by the trial Court
in paragraph 54 as well as paragraph 55 of the judgment, this Court is of the
considered view that as there was no intention to commit murder, without
commenting anything on the merit of the case, this Court deem it proper to
suspend the jail sentence of the appellant. Accordingly, I.A. No.8854/2023 is
allowed.
The execution of jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended subject to
depositing the fine amount, (if not already deposited) and on his furnishing a
personal bond to a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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 on 27.05.2024 and also on
such other dates, as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
mn
