Santosh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 16598 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Santosh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 June, 2024

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

                                                               1                            CRA-5293-2022
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                       CRA No. 5293 of 2022
                                                 (SANTOSH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 10-06-2024
                                 Shri Rahul Maheshwari - Advocate for appellant through Video

                           Conferencing.
                                 Shri Bhuwan Gautam - Govt. Advocate for respondent/State through

Video Conferencing.

Heard on I.A.No.9373/2024 filed for urgent hearing during vacation.

On due consideration, the same is allowed for the reasons stated therein. Also heard on I.A.No.2698/2024, which is first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence on behalf of the appellant Santosh.

Appellant stands convicted under Sections 302 and 506 (Part-2) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Life with fine of Rs.25,000/- and 01 years RI with fine of Rs.500/- respectively with usual default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant taking this Court towards the judgment

passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Sonkatch, Distt. Dewas in S.T. No.19/2021 on 31/05/2022 and relying upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2023) 9 SCC 164 and submits that co-accused juvenile has been acquitted by the Juvenile Justice Board and on the same set of facts and evidence, present appellant could not have been acquitted. Knife, which has allegedly been recovered from the present appellant, over which no blood stained was found during FSL examination. There are material contradictions

2 CRA-5293-2022

and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Appellant is languishing in jail since 07/05/2021 and looking to old pendency of the cases for consideration, final conclusion of this appeal would take sufficient long time. There is a strong case in favour of the appellant. Hence, the application be allowed and the execution of the remaining part of the jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended with further grant of bail to the satisfaction of this Court, till the final disposal of this appeal Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the application for suspension of sentence by inviting attention of this Court towards para 6, 9, 11, 18 and 19 of the impugned judgment and submits that

there is ample direct and medical evidence available on record to connect the appellant Santosh with the offence of murder of Shubham, therefore, he prays that no case for grant of bail and suspension of sentence is made out.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record with due care in light of the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the appellant.

Looking to the direct evidence available on record against the appellant, which is corroborated by the medical evidence, we are not inclined to suspend the jail sentence and to extend the benefit of bail to the present appellant. Hence, I.A.No.2698/2024, which is first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence on behalf of the appellant Santosh, is hereby dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.

                             (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)                             (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
                                      V. JUDGE                                        V. JUDGE





                                  3   CRA-5293-2022
                           Tej