Madhya Pradesh High Court
Murad Ali 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. 1279 of 2019
(MURAD ALI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 01-03-2024
Ms. Nikita Jain - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Rajesh Shukla - Additional Advocate General for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No. 1361 of 2024, fourth repeat application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.4- Kasim. Out of his earlier applications two have been dismissed
as withdrawn and in one application interim suspension was granted.
Present appellant stood convicted under Sections 302 and 147 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.3,000/- and RI
for two years with a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations vide judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 29.11.2018 passed by Seventeenth
Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Sessions Trial Case No.373/2012.
The present appellant so far has undergone jail sentence of 05 years and
07 months, as stated by learned counsel for the appellants.
As per prosecution story, on 16.04.2012 at about 8:35 PM, complainant
Munna alias Chhinga Churaila lodged an FIR at Police Station Utila, District
Gwalior to the effect that he is a resident of village Tihauli and works as a
laborer. On that day, at around 8:00 pm, he was at his home when his nephews
Kalyan Churaila and Rahul Churaila came running and shouting that Vijay Mama
has been killed and when he asked them, they told that when they had gone to
house of Vijay to tie cows and animals, they had seen that due to old rivalry,
accused persons namely, Murad Ali, Firoz, Kaasam, Tadi alias Islam,
Brijmohan, Phoolsingh and Bharat caught hold of Vijay and threw him and
Murad Ali and his sons Firoz, Kaasam and Tadi put a noose around the neck of
Vijay and the accused Brijmohan, Phoolsingh Churaila and Bharat Singh Yadav
together pulled the noose which resulted in the death of uncle Vijay. On the said
report of the complainant, FIR was registered against the accused persons at
Crime No.29/12 under Sections 302, 147, 149 of IPC. After committal, charges
were framed against the appellant and other co-accused which they denied and
requested for trial. The Sessions Court on appreciation of evidence placed on
record convicted and sentenced the present appellant as aforesaid.
Learned counsel for appellants while taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits that the Sessions Court
has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct perspective. The
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. It is submitted that under
similar facts and circumstances, similarly placed co-accused/appellant No.5-
Firoz and appellant No.6-Tadi @ Islam have already been extended benefit of
suspension of sentence by this Court vide orders dated 09.01.2024 and
26.02.2024 and the case of present appellant is akin to that of the co-
accused/appellants No.5-Firoz and appellant No.6-Tadi @ Islam. He seeks parity
in treatment. It is further submitted that present appellant has so far undergone
incarceration of 05 years and 07 months and the appeal being of 2019 is not
likely to be decided in the near future. Hence, learned counsel submits that the
present appellant may be extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and
grant of bail on the ground of parity.
Per contra, Shri Shukla, learned Additional Advocate General, 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, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the rival contentions touching merits of the case but
regard being had to the fact that present appellant so far has undergone jail
sentence of 5 years and 7 months and that the benefit of suspension of sentence
has already been extended to the similarly placed co-accused/appellant No.5-
Firoz and appellant No.6-Tadi @ Islam by this Court vide orders dated
09.01.2024 and 26.02.2024, coupled with the fact that the appeal which is of the
year 2019 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. 1361 of 2024 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of appellant No.4- Kasim 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.4- Kasim is directed to appear before the Registry of this
Court on 30.05.2024 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) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
pd
