Madhya Pradesh High Court

Santosh Kaurav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 May, 2024

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                                 1
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT GWALIOR
                                                         CRA No. 5189 of 2024
                                          (SANTOSH KAURAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 03-05-2024
                                 Shri Satya Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the appellants.

                                 Shri Rajendra Singh Yadav-Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.8301 of 2024, first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellants with an alternative prayer for grant of temporary bail as record has not been received.

The appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 12.04.2024 passed by Court of Sessions Judge, Lahar Dist. Bhind (M.P.) in S.T. No.10/2019 whereby, appellants have been convicted and sentenced under Section 452, 323/34 and 325/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs. 3,000/-, undergo rigorous imprisonment for three monhts with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs. 3,000/-, respectively, with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that learned trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellants without appreciating the evidence on merit. Further submission is that there are material omissions and contradictions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. Appellants were on bail during trial. They never misused the liberty granted to him during trial. Eye witness Ramu (PW/3) and Dharmendra (PW/4) have not supported the case of prosecution. Even Malkhan (PW/1) and Jitendra (PW/2) have not supported the case of prosecution. Therefore, learned counsel for appellants at this stage orally prays

for grant of temporary suspension of sentence and grant of bail for a limited period.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without commenting on merits of the case, it is directed that subject to depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one

solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, the remaining jail sentence of the appellants shall remain temporarily suspended for a period of two months from today and he be released on bail.

List the case on 08.07.2024.

Meanwhile, Registry is directed to call the record of the Court below. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for compliance.

Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE