Madhya Pradesh High Court
Uma Shankar Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 February, 2024
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4473 of 2017
(UMA SHANKAR PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 22-02-2024
Shri S.K. Patel - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Ajay Shukla - Government Advocate for the respondent-State.
Heard on I.A. No.29813 of 2023, an application under Section 389(1)
of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant
Umashankar Patel arising out of judgment dated 31/8/2017 delivered in S.C.
No.11/2015 passed by Special Judge (M.P. Dacoity and Vyapharan Prabhavit
Kshetra Adhiniyam,1981), District Panna (MP).
Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section
148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for one year with fine of Rs2,000/-,
under Section 396 of IPC read with Section 11/13 of M.P. Dacoity Evam
Vyapaharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 and sentenced to undergo RI
for life with fine of Rs.5000/- and under Section 307 read with Section 149 of
the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine of Rs.2000/- and
under Section 325 read with Section 149 of IPC (3 counts) and sentenced to
undergo RI for three years on each count with fine of Rs.2,000/- on each
counts and under Section 323 read with Section 149 of the IPC (3 counts) and
sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months on each count and under Section 25/27
of Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo RI for one year with fine of
Rs.2000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the co-accused persons
have already been granted bail and their sentence has also been suspended by
this Court vide order dated 4.12.2023 passed in IA No.28219/2023 and the case
of the present appellant is also similar to that of co-accused persons. He further
submits that the judgment and findings of the trial Court are perverse and are
bad in law. It is further submitted that there no material on record to connect the
present appellant with the crime. Appellant has nothing to do with the said
crime. It is also submitted that there was no motive or premeditation on behalf
of the appellants to commit murder. Appellant has been falsely implicated in the
case.
He further submits that there was a political dispute between the partied
and due to which the present appellant has been falsely implicated in the case.
Appellant has no criminal antecedents He further submits that witness namely
Vinod PW-13, Ram Karan PW-14, Nanka, Raju, Sappu, Babulal and Budhu
have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the
offence under Section 396 has wrongly been added in the crime as no looted
property has been seized by the police.
It is further submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove his case
beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, benefit of doubt ought to have been given
to the appellant. There are material contradictions and omissions in the
statement of prosecution witnesses.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there are omnibus
allegations of assaulting the deceased and only two gunshot injuries have been
found on the person of Ramkaran and Prakash. It is also urged that deceased
has expired not on account of gunshot injuries but on account of other injuries.
Appellants have remained in custody for about 8 years and 8 months. It is also
urged that no blood stains have been fond on the Lathi recovered in the case in
the FSL report. Further, referring to the judgment passed by Apex Court in the
case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P and Anr, 2020 11 SCC 648 , it
is urged that just on the basis of criminal antecedents, application for
suspension of sentence cannot be dismissed. It is further submitted that the final
hearing of this case is not possible in near future. Therefore, it has been prayed
that the jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer on the basis of
objection.
After taking into consideration overall evidence on record, including
nature of evidence available on record against the appellant and period of
custody and injuries found on the person of deceased and other persons
coupled with the fact that early hearing of this appeal is not possible in near
future and the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted the
benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail by this court vide order
dated 04.12.2023 and submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, we
deem it proper to suspend the jail sentence of the present appellant.
Accordingly, I.A No.29813 of 2023 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed
that the appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a
sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) with one solvent surety
each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with a further
direction to appear before the trial Court Panna on 30.04.2024 and also on
such other dates, as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
C. c. as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) (ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
sh
