Rampramod Choudhary vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 6696 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rampramod Choudhary vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 March, 2024

Author: Maninder S. Bhatti

Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR CRA No. 13641 of 2023 (RAMPRAMOD CHOUDHARY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 05-03-2024 Shri Vijay Kumar Lakhera - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Chandrapal Singh Parmar - Govt. Advocate for the State.

The appeal being arguable is admitted for final hearing. Heard on I.A.No.1950/2024, which is the first application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail.

The appellant has been convicted and sentenced under sections 498-A, 304-B and 306 of the IPC and under Section 4 o the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 to suffer R.I. for 2 years, 7 years, 7 years and 2 years and payment of fine of Rs.500/-, Rs.1000/-, Rs.1000/- and Rs.500/- respectively with default stipulations.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that in the present case, as per allegations so levelled by the prosecution, no case is made out against the appellant. Learned counsel contends that as per prosecution

witnesses, the father of the deceased came at the place of the in-laws of the deceased on the date when the deceased committed suicide. It is contended by the counsel that the testimony of the father of the deceased nowhere reflects that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and torture by the appellant herein. Learned counsel submits that Para 6 of the testimony of the father of the deceased is important. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the appellant has suffered custody of 2 years and six months as of now as against the sentence of 7 years. Therefore, taking into consideration, the totality of the

circumstances the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that as per analysis made by the trial Court in para 40 of the impugned judgment and ensued findings, no case is made out for grant of bail to the appellant.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. Perusal of the records reflects that father of the deceased in para 6 of his testimony says that he was there on the date when the deceased committed suicide and he also met his daughter on that date. Prima facie, para 6 of deposition of the father of the deceased does not disclose that, any complaint

was made by the deceased to her father.

Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, coupled with the fact that the appellant has suffered incarceration of 2 years and six months as of now, this Court deems it proper to enlarge the appellant on bail. The I.A.No.1950/2024 is allowed.

I t is directed that the execution of the remaining jail sentence passed against appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he be released on bail subject to depositing fine amount, if not already deposited and upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. fifty thousand only) with one surety in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on 13/05/2024 and on such further dates as may be fixed by the trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

List the matter for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE ac