Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shivcharan @ Shilya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 May, 2024

                                                             1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT GWALIOR
                                                       CRA No. 1294 of 2017
                                    (SHIVCHARAN @ SHILYA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 03-05-2024
                                Shri Atul Gupta- Advocate for the appellant.

                                Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla - Additional Advocate General for the
                          respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.8586 of 2024, second repeat application under Section 389 (1) Cr.P.C moved on behalf of appellant - Shivcharan @ Shilya for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail. His earlier application (IA No.

1259 of 2022) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 14.9.2022.

Appellant Shivcharan @ Shilya stood convicted under Section 302/34 and 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.3000/- and R.I. for one year with a fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.9.2017 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Sheopur, District Sheopur (MP) in Sessions Trial No.33/2011.

The present appellant so far has undergone eight years and four month's incarceration.

As per prosecution story, on 7.7.2010 complainant has lodged a report to the effect that she lives in Village Tulsef and on the petty issue of keeping the bricks the appellant Shiv Charan exhorted and co-accused Mangilal caused an axe blow on the head of Nirmala, thereafter Shivcharan and Dharmu assaulted her and when her husband Yogesh came to rescue her co-accused Mangilal caused an axe blow on his head and Shivcharan and Dharmu also assaulted him by their weapons, due to which he succumbed. The FIR was

registered and investigation was set in motion. Upon completion of investigation including recording of statements, collection of evidence and necessary formalities, challan was filed. The Sessions Court, on appreciation of evidence placed on record, convicted and sentenced the present appellant, as mentioned above.

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 the present appellant has falsely been implicated in the instant case. The appeal being of

2017 is not likely to be decided in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel submits that the appellant may be extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Per contra, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent/State, while supporting the impugned judgment 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.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety particularly the role of the appellant that he has actively participated in the crime and there is direct allegation against the appellant of causing lacerated injuries on the head of the deceased and according to Dr. B.K. Shakya (PW.2) who has conducted autopsy of the deceased found that multiple lacerated wounds on the head are the cause of death, in the considered opinion of this court it is not a fit case for granting bail to appellant. Hence, application (I.A.No.8586 of 2024) for suspension of sentence is hereby rejected.

                             (RAJENDRA KUMAR-IV)       (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
                                    JUDGE                       JUDGE

                          (aspr)