Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bharat @ Vicky vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 3882 of 2018
(BHARAT @ VICKY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 26-02-2024
Shri Atul Gupta - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Neelesh Singh Tomar - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on IA No. 534 of 2024, first application under Section 389 (1)
CrPC moved on behalf of sole appellant - Bharat alias Vicky for suspension of
jail sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant Bharat alias Vicky stands convicted under Section 302 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-, under
Section 201 of IPC and sentenced to suffer seven years' RI with fine of
Rs.500/- and under Section 25(1)(B)-b of Arms Act and sentenced to suffer
one year's RI with fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulations vid e judgment
dated 02.02.2018 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge Vidisha (MP) in
Sessions Trial No.61/2017.
The present appellant so far has undergone more than 8 years and two
months' jail incarceration.
As per prosecution story, the railways trackmen/patrolmen Mahendra and
Deepak, during patrolling in the intervening night of 30th and 31st of December,
2016 at about 01.05 am, found a dead body on the site of railway track.
Mahendra informed to sub-station Manager R. K. Singh and through memo,
information was sent to GRP Vidisha at about 1.50 am. Thereafter, ASI S.K.
Ahirwar and Constable Rakumar of Police Station GRP were sent for
investigation but in the midnight Panchnama could not be prepared. On the
morning of next day, at about 7.30 am Panchnama was prepared by Police
Station GRP and having seized sample of simple soil and blood-stained soil
from the spot, seizure memos were prepared. Blood-stained slipper, a quarter
of countrymade liquor and sickle were recovered near the deadbody. Spot map
was prepared. The dead body was identified by the brothers-in-law Surendra
(wife's brother) and Mathru (sister's husband) of the deceased as Rajkumar S/o
Karodilal Ahirwar. On merg intimation under Section 174 CrPC, merg was
registered. On 02.01.2017 FIR was registered at Crime No. 2/2017 under
Section 302 of IPC. After collection of material evidence, challan was filed and
the case was committed to the Sessions Trial. The Sessions Court on proper
appreciation of evidence placed on record convicted and sentenced the present
appellant as referred above.
Learned counsel for the appellant, while taking exception to the impugned
judgment interalia, submits that it is a case of false implication. The entire case
is based on circumstantial evidence. The present appellant along with other two
co-accused persons have been dropped in on the strength of the statements of
Babu Khan (PW/6) and Raju Rajput (PW/12), claimed to be eye-witnesses,
who have not supported the prosecution story before the trial Court and have
been declared hostile. Even they have not attributed any overt act against any
person much less the present appellant. It is submitted that the present
appellant so far has undergone more than 8 years and two months' jail
incarceration. The appeal is of the year 2018 and there is no likelihood of early
hearing of this appeal in near future. It is further submitted that co-accused
Akash alias Tunda, who had suffered jail incarceration of six years, has been
extended benefit of suspension of jail sentence vide order dated 17.09.2021
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1724 of 2018. Under such circumstances,
learned counsel submits that the present appellant may be extended the benefit
of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that from
the present appellant a motorcycle and knife have been recovered. As per DNA
report, blood stains found on the knife was found to be that of deceased
Rajkumar, therefore, possibility of complicity of the present appellant in the
crime cannot be ruled out, though learned Public Prosecutor does not dispute
that it is a case of circumstantial evidence. The appellant has criminal
antecedents. Hence, no exception may be taken in the matter of grant of benefit
of suspension of sentence.
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 only fact that
present appellant so far has undergone actual incarceration of more than 8 years
and two months' jail incarceration, coupled with the fact that co-accused Akash
alias Tunda, has been extended benefit of suspension of jail sentence vide order
dated 17.09.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1724 of 2018, and that 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.534/2024 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of present appellant- Bharat alias Vicky 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 Lakhs only) with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court
subject to the following conditions :-
1. The appellant shall mark his attendance before concerned Police
Station on every 2nd and 4th Saturdays of each month.
2. If the appellant is 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.
Appellant is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on
31.05.2024 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) (ANAND PATHAK)
JUDGE JUDGE
yog
YOGESH
VERMA
2024.02.27
11:51:32
+05'30'
