Madhya Pradesh High Court

Narendra Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2024

Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal

Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal

                                                            1
                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                     CRA No. 9756 of 2022
                                      (NARENDRA KOL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                         Dated : 01-05-2024
                               Shri Arunodaya Singh - Advocate for the appellant.

                               Smt. Ekta Gupta - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on admission.

The appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A.No.3546 of 2024 repeat application under Section

389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.1 Narendra Kol.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 304(B) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 year with fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 498(A) IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.500/- and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced to undergo R.I for one year with default stipulations.

His first application was dismissed as withdrawn by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.12.2023 (I.A.No.26611 of 2023).

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that marriage of deceased was solemnized with appellant on 11.05.2018 and deceased committed suicide on 15.07.2020. Appellant has complete the sentence of three years, nine months, out of 10 years. In postmortem report, there are no external injuries. After taking this Court through the depositions, especially, cross-examinations of father (PW-1), mother (PW-2) and sister (PW-3), it is urged that from their depositions, demand of dowry and cruelty/harassment with respect to dowry is not proved and it is also urged that FIR has been lodged against appellant

because PW-1 etc. have asked appellant family not to bring down deceased on the ground but they did not comply with the same, therefore, in a fit of rage, FIR was lodged. In the instant case, presumption under 113 of Evidence Act, cannot be drawn because it is not established that deceased was harassed in connection with demand of dowry. There was no demand of dowry at the time of solemnization of marriage. Co-accused have been released on bail. After referring to para-30 of impugned judgment, it reveals that trial Court has convicted appellant solely on the ground that appellant was residing with deceased till death of deceased. On above grounds, it is urged that jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State, on the other hand has opposed the application.

Appellant's earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 08.12.2023 and present I.A. was filed on 06.02.2024.

Perusal of record of the case reveals that no FIR has been lodged by father, mother and sister etc. FIR has been registered after marg inquiry.

I have also gone through depositions of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3, especially, para-3 of PW-1 and PW-2 and para-2 of PW-3 and appellant being husband of deceased, this Court does not deem it proper to suspend jail sentence of appellant.

Hence, I.A. No.3546 of 2024 repeat application filed by appellant is dismissed.

(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE

vai