Keshav Khangar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 12307 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Keshav Khangar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 May, 2024

Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal

Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal

                                                               1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                        CRA No. 6096 of 2023
                                             (KESHAV KHANGAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                        CRA No. 7250 of 2023
                                           (BETU @ PRAVEEN PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 02-05-2024
                                 Shri Ajay Pal Singh - Advocate for appellant-Keshav Khangar in CRA
                          No.6096 of 2023.
                                 Shri Ahadulla Usmani - Advocate for appellant-Betu @ Praveen Patel
                          in CRA No.7250 of 2023.

                                 Shri Anuj Singh - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Trial Court record has been received.

Heard on admission.

Trial Court record perused.

Prima-facie, these appeals seem to be arguable. Hence, admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A. No.9865 of 2023 (in CRA No.6096/2023) & I.A. No.13522 of 2023 (in CRA No.7250/2023), applications under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants,

pending the appeal.

Appellants were convicted alongwith co-accused for commission of offence under Sections 304 part-I & 201 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years with fine of Rs.5,000/- & R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/- respectively with default stipulations vide judgment dated 26.04.2023 passed in Session Trial No.800242/2015 (State of M.P. vs. Keshav

Khangar & others) by 23rd Additional Session Judge, Jabalpur (MP). The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

Learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that appellants have b een erroneously convicted by learned trial Court as it has not properly appreciated the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material on record. It is submitted that evidence of prosecution witnesses is full of omissions and contradictions and such omissions and contradictions have not been considered in right perspective by the learned trial Court. It is submitted that deceased has died in the night whereas appellants had left the home of deceased at 02:00 pm after celebrating the party of meat & liquor with the deceased. It is also submitted that Dr. Lalit Tiwari was called by co-accused Durga at 09:30 pm. In the postmortem report, digestive food has been found in the stomach of

the deceased which goes to show that incident took place after leaving the house of deceased by these two persons. Deceased has died sometime after 02:00 pm or after digestion of food which takes at least 5-6 hours after eating. Therefore, learned trial Judge was not justified to convict the appellants for commission of offence along with the co-accused. It is further submitted that they were on bail during trial and have not misused the liberty. They have already suffered almost one year in jail after delivery of judgment. They have fair chances to succeed in appeal. There is no possibility of coming of this appeal for hearing in near future. Therefore, if the execution of jail sentence of appellants is not suspended, the purpose of filing this appeal would become futile. Thus, it is prayed that custodial jail sentence of the appellants may be suspended and they be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellants. He has drawn attention of this Court towards evidence of deceased's daughter Monika (P.W.-1), deceased's

son Raja (P.W.-3) & Dr. Lalit Tiwari (P.W.-9) and also post-mortem report and has submitted that co-accused Durga was having illicit relations with appellant Betu @ Praveen Patel (appellant in CRA No.7250/2023) and in furtherance of their common intention, they all have killed the deceased, therefore, findings recorded by the learned trial Court are proper.

Considering the evidence of deceased's daughter Monika (P.W.-1), deceased's son Raja (P.W.-3) and Investigation Officer Anil Singh (P.W.-13) and medical evidence, I am of the view that no case for suspension of jail sentence is made out. Consequently, I.A. No.9865 of 2023 (in CRA No.6096/2023) & I.A. No.13522 of 2023 (in CRA No.7250/2023) are dismissed.

List for final hearing in due course.

(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE

@shish