Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deepak vs State Of M.P. on 26 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 825 of 2012
(DEEPAK AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF M.P.)
Dated : 26-02-2024
Shri Trishant Mishra - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Pawan Singh Raghuvanshi - Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-State.
Heard o n IA No.1583 of 2024, seventh repeat application and I.A.
No.2391 of 2024, first application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellant No.1-Deepak
Mewati and appellant No.2-Bacchu @ Ajay Kumar.
Appellant No.1-Deepak Mewati stands convicted under Section 148 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo 01 years RI with fine of Rs.200/-, Section 302
and 302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo LI with fine of Rs.3000/-,
Section 25(1-B)A of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo 02 years RI with fine
of Rs.500/- and Section 27(1) of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo 05 years
RI with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations respectively and appellant No.2
- Bacchu @ Ajay Kumar stands convicted under Section 148 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo 01 year RI with fine of Rs.200/- and Section 302, 302/149
of IPC and sentenced to undergo LI with fine of Rs.3000/- with default
stipulations respectively vid e judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 12th September 2012 passed by Third Additional Judge to the Court of
First Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior in S.T.No.379/2011.
Appellant No.1- Deepak so far has undergone 12 years 09 months and 06
days with remission and 11 years 04 months and 29 days without remission.
Appellant No.2-Bacchu @ Ajay so far has undergone 12 years 09 months and
01 days with remission and 11 years 05 months and 07 days without remission
as per jail report dated 20-02-2024.
Prosecution story as found proved is that on 27.04.2011 complainant
Alok (P.W.4) lodged report (Ex.P/18) to the effect that on that day at about 6-
6.15 AM he had taken his father, who was Inspector in Municipal Corporation,
in a car to Daulatganj, where his father after counting the employees of
Municipal Corporation while sitting on stairs, sent them for work. At that
juncture, miscreants Surendra @ Bhola, Rishi, Deepak (present appellant No.1),
Rakesh @ Tota, Bachchu @ Ajay Kumar (present appellant No.2), Pappu
Badauri, Rakesh Khare and Ramsingh (present appellant) came on the spot
armed with country made pistol, pistols and revolver. All the accused
surrounded and after throwing his father on ground fired 7-8 rounds at him.
While firing they were saying that his father was being punished for the mistake
of his son. Thereafter the miscreants fled from the spot. Complainant went near
his father and found that he had suffered gun shot injuries on head, ear, neck,
chest and thighs. The complainant took his father to hospital where the doctors
declared him dead. Accordingly, case was registered against all accused
persons. Upon completion of investigation, challan was filed. The case was
committed to the Sessions Court for trial. The trial Court upon critical
evaluation of the evidence placed on record and statements recorded, convicted
and sentenced the present appellant as stated above.
Learned counsel for appellants No.1 & 2 while taking exception to the
impugned judgment inter alia supported the instant applications primarily on
the ground of long jail incarceration as so far, appellant No.1 has suffered actual
sentence of 11 years 04 months and 29 days and appellant No.2-Bacchu @
Ajay has suffered actual sentence of 11 years 05 months and 07 days. That
apart, it is submitted that the impugned judgment suffers from surmises and
conjectures. This Court has already extended benefit of suspension of jail
sentence to co-accused Rakesh alias Tota in Criminal Appeal No. 758/2012 and
Surendra alias Bholla in Criminal Appeal No. 757/2012 vide order dated
12.01.2024. The appeal is of the year 2012 and there is no likelihood of early
hearing of this appeal in the near future. Under such circumstances, learned
counsel prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail on behalf of present
appellant on the ground of parity.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application and prays
for its rejection while supporting the impugned judgment.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court refrains from
commenting upon the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties
touching the merits of the case, however, regard being had to the fact that
appellant No.1 has suffered actual sentence of 11 years 04 months and 29 days
and appellant No.2-Bacchu @ Ajay has suffered actual sentence of 11 years 05
months and 07 days and the benefit of suspension of jail sentence has already
been extended to co-accused Rakesh and Surendra vide order dated
12.01.2024 in Criminal Appeals No. 758/2012 and 757/2012, respectively,
coupled with the fact that the appeal which is of the year 2012 is not likely to be
decided in the near future, we are of the view that present appellants No.1 & 2
are entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No.1583 of 2024 and I.A. No.2391 of 2024 stand
allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellants No.1 & 2 shall
remain suspended during pendency of the present appeal and they shall be
released on bail subject to verification of the factum of depositing the fine
amount and on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lac only) each with one solvent surety each in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
If appellants No.1 & 2 are found to be involved in any other criminal
activity either against the present complainant or anybody else, the respondent/
State and the complainant shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of
bail.
Appellants No.1 & 2 are directed to appear before the Registry of this
Court first on 29-05-2024 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this
behalf.
Accordingly, both the I.As. stand allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.As. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
(ROHIT ARYA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
vc
VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
2024.02.27
11:03:57 +05'30'
