Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rambaks Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 May, 2024

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 4426 of 2023
(RAMBAKS JATAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 08-05-2024
Shri Brajesh Tyagi - Advocate for appellant No.2- Ummed Jatav.

Shri Rajiv Sharma - Advocate for appellant No.3-Mohar Singh.
Shri Madhukar Kulshrestha - Advocate for appellant No.4 - Ramvir
Jatav.
Shri Rajesh Shukla - Additional Advocate General for the State.

Heard o n I.A. Nos.12178/2023, first application under Section 389
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant 3- Mohar Singh, I.A. No.8904/2024, first application under
Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on
behalf of appellant 2- Ummed Jatav and I.A. No.2367/2024, first application
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved
on behalf of appellant 4- Ramvir Jatav.
2. Learned counsel for the State adopts the return filed in case of
appellant No.3-Mohar Singh for the purpose of application filed on behalf of

appellants No.2 & 4.
3. Appellants stood convicted under Section 302/149 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section
147 of IPC and sentenced to undergo six months' R.I. with a fine of Rs.500/-
and under Section 341 of IPC with fine of Rs. 500/-, with default stipulations
vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.02.2023 passed by
IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Jaura, District Morena (M.P.) in ST
No.163/2015.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMAN TIWARI
Signing time: 5/9/2024
11:58:08 AM
2
4. Appellants No.2 to 4 have suffered about two years and two months
of incarceration, as stated by learned counsel for the appellants No.2 to 4.
5 . A s per the prosecution story, on 24.03.2015, deceased Genda was
going to the field to answer the nature's call. Rambaks, Ramlakhan apprehended
him on the way and after some altercation, Rambaks gave blow by stick on the
head, due to which, blood started oozing out. Thereafter, appellant-Ummed
pelted a stone on Genda which hit him on the knee. Ramlakhan joined them and
started abusing. After hearing the noise, his brother Srinivas and his sister-in-law
Lilavati came who saw the incident and intervened. While leaving, accused
threatened to kill. Thereafter, an FIR was lodged at Crime No.31/15 at Police

Station Chinnauni.
Later on, appellants Mohar Singh and Ramvir Jatav have also been added
as accused. As per autopsy report, deceased died due to rapture of spleen, not
because of head injury. He was aged about 65 years. The allegation of assault
was made in dying declaration against all the accused persons.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants No.2 to 4 while taking exception to
the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence submits present
appellants are innocent and have falsely been roped in the present case. Learned
counsel for the appellants No.3 & 4 submits that appellants No.3 & 4 were not
named in the FIR, while learned counsel for appellant No.2-Ummed submits
that as per allegations, this appellant only pelted stone which hit on the knee of
the deceased. That apart, the appeal being of 2023 is not likely to be decided in
near future. On these grounds, it is prayed that remaining jail sentence of the
appellants No.2 to 4 be suspended.
7 . Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Signature Not Verified
respondent/State opposed the application while supporting the impugned

Signed by: AMAN TIWARI Signing time: 5/9/2024 11:58:08 AM

judgment of conviction and order of sentence with submission that looking to the nature of offence, they are not entitled for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

8 . Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties coupled with the overt act of the appellants and that appellants No.3 & 4 were not named in the FIR and also taking note of the fact that final conclusion of the appeal will take considerable long time, we deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellants No.2 to 4.

9. Accordingly, I.A. No.12178/2023, I.A. No.8904/2024 & I.A. No.2367/2024 are allowed and the execution of remaining jail sentence of the appellants No.2 to 4 is hereby suspended till the final disposal of this appeal and it is ordered that the appellants No.2 to 4 be released on bail on their depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, and upon furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one solvent surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with a further direction to appear before the Registry of this Court on 21.08.2024 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.

C.C. as per rules.

                            (VIVEK RUSIA)                                     (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
                                JUDGE                                                 JUDGE

                         Aman