Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rameshchand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 March, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 9894 of 2022
(RAMESHCHAND AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 01-03-2024
Shri Harish Sharma, Advocate for the appellants.
Shri S.S.Kushwaha, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.2614/2023, fifth application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.1 Rameshchand Ahirwar. The earlier applications were dismissed
as withdrawn while benefit of interim bail was extended on two occasions vide
orders dated 2/12/2022 and 5/7/2023
Present appellant stands convicted under Section 148 of the IPC and
sentenced to undergo RI for 2 years with fine of Rs.1000/-; under section
302/149 of the IPC to suffer life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/-; under
section 326/149 of the IPC to undergo RI for 5 years with fine of Rs.1000/-;
under section 324/149 of the IPC to undergo RI for 1 year with fine of
Rs.1000/- and under section 323/149 (on three counts) to undergo RI for 6
months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and under section 436 of the IPC to
undergo RI for 5 years with fine of Rs.2000/- with corresponding default
stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
30.08.2022 passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Sewdha in S.T.
No.54/2016.
The present appellant so far has undergone incarceration of 1 year and 11
months.
Prosecution story, as found proved, is that owing to previous animosity,
on 3/1/2016, appellant Ramesh along with co-convicts namely Chhotu,
Hardayal, Bhavsingh, Jagpal, Manoj, Harnam, Anil, Matadeen, Bhawan Singh,
Harcharan, Dharmesh, Babu and Banti, all armed with Lathis and Axes,
surrounded Thakurdas, brother of complainant Prakash and started assaulting
him while abusing. Thakurdas ran towards his house while screaming for being
saved. When complainant Prakash, his cousin Gopal, Suresh and nephew
Ravindra, sister-in-law Rajkumari came forward to intervene, then they were
also assaulted by the miscreants. Chhotu gave a Lathi blow on the head of
Prakash, Hardayal gave an Axe blow on the head of Gopal while Bhav Singh
also assaulted him with Lathi causing injuries on head and hand of Gopal,
Jagpal gave an Axe blow on head of Suresh while Manoj wielded Lathis at him
causing injury on his head, Harnam gave a Lathi blow on the neck of Ravindra,
Anil and Matadeen caught hold of Rajkumari while Bhagwan Singh and
Harcharan assaulted her with Axe and Lathis causing injuries on her head and
hand, Thakurdas was caught hold of by Matadeen and Dharmendra while
Hardayal gave axe blow on his head and when he fell down then Bhav Singh,
Ramesh, Babu and Banti and all fourteen miscreants assaulted him with Lathis
and kicks due to which he lost his voice. Thereafter, all the miscreants set his
house ablaze. All the injured persons were taken to Datia Hospital in an
Ambulance where doctor found that Thakurdas had already died. Besides, the
injured persons had also been threatened by the miscreants with life in case they
disclosed their names in the FIR. During investigation, accused persons were
apprehended and statements of witnesses were recorded. Challan was filed
before JMFC, who committed the case to the Court of Session for trial. The
trial Court, after due appreciation of the evidence on record, convicted and
sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.
Learned counsel for appellant while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the trial Court has
not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. The
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. Omnibus allegations have
been levelled against the present appellant. Prakash Ahirwar (PW2) has deposed
in para 18 of his evidence that present appellant was not present on the spot at
the time of incident. The appellant has so far undergone incarceration of about 1
year and 11 months. The appellant has remained enlarged on bail and has never
misused the liberty so granted. It is further submitted that the appeal being of
2022 is not likely to be decided in the near future. On these grounds, learned
counsel submits that the present appellant may be extended the benefit of
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the
overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the appeal
which is of the year 2022 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, the I.A. stands allowed and it is directed that the jail
sentence of present appellant no.1 namely Rameshchand Ahirwar 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 Lacs only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court.
Appellant No.1 Harcharan is directed to appear before the Registry of
this Court first on 02.07.2024 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) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
ojha
