Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deshraj @ Gutta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2024
Author: Sunita Yadav
Bench: Sunita Yadav
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 14140 of 2023
(DESHRAJ @ GUTTA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-02-2024
Shri Pulkit Rastogi, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Nitin Goyal -P.L.- appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Heard on the question of admission.
This appeal being arguable is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No. 2353 of 2024, first application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant
No. 1/Deshraj @ Gutta.
The appeal has been preferred by the appellants under Section 374 of the
Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 14.09.2023 passed by Special Judge (MPDVPK Act), District Shivpuri
(M.P.) in SC DOCT No. 01/2021, whereby appellants have been convicted and
sentenced under Section 394 of IPC to undergo Five Years RI with fine of
Rs.3000/-, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant No. 1/Deshraj @ Gutta submits that the
Court below has wrongly convicted the appellant without appreciating the
materials available on record. There are material contradictions and omissions in
the statements of the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that FIR was
lodged against unknown person and PW/1 Sabarmati in her cross examination
at para 5 specifically stated that the police personnel have shown her the
appellant/accused at police station before identification and informed that the
appellant is the person who had committed the crime and on the basis of
information given by the police personnel, PW/1 had stated that the
appellant/accused had committed the offence. It is further submitted that PW/2
- Dablu Kushwah in his statement at para 7 has clearly stated that he had already
seen the appellant/accused before identification and before recording of the
evidence, the Police Inspector had told him to identify the person as
culprit/accused who is standing in the Court. It is further submitted that both the
aforesaid witnesses have also stated that there is no specific identification of
the jewelleries, which were recovered. The appellant No. 1 had served
approximately 14 months of incarceration out of total awarded jail sentence.
The appeal is likely to take long time to come up for final hearing and the
appellant has hope and believe that he would succeed in this case. Hence, he
prayed to suspend the jail sentence and grant of bail to appellant No. 1/Deshraj
@ Gutta.
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, application (I.A. No. 2353 of 2024)
is allowed and 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) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the
appellant No. 1/Deshraj @ Gutta shall remain suspended and he be released on
bail. He is further directed to mark his presence before the Registry of this
Court on 21.5.2024 and on subsequent dates as may be given in this regard till
final disposal of this appeal.
List the case in due course.
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
Durgekar
