Harveer vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 13343 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Harveer vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 May, 2024

Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar

Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                      CRA No. 1673 of 2024
                                                (HARVEER Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 09-05-2024
                                 Shri Krishna Kartikey Sharma- learned counsel for the appellant.

                                 Shri Kuldeep Singh- learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State

Heard on the question of admission.

Record of the trial Court has been received.

Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing. Also heard on IA No.3590 of 2024, first application under Section

389(1) Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant Harveer Ahirwar seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Appellant stood convicted under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.3,000/- with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10/01/2024 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Guna (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 355/2021.

Learned Counsel for appellant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that only one injury was caused to injured -Rajesh.

Rajesh was examined on 06/10/2021 by the Medical Officer but his x-ray examination was conducted on 07/10/2021. Learned counsel referring to Final Report in Crime No.592/2021 of PS Aron (Ex.D-1), contends that there was another quarrel in the night of 06/10/2021 between Rajesh and Sarnam Singh. Injured -Rajesh might have sustained further injury in that quarrel, therefore, fracture on right hand of Rajesh cannot be attributed to the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

Learned counsel further submits that the impugned judgment passed by learned Trial Court is based on assumption, conjectures and surmises. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in convicting and sentencing the present appellant without appreciating the prosecution evidence properly. There are material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Appellant was aged 23 years at the time of incident. No criminal antecedent is reported against the appellant. He was released on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty so granted to him. Appellant remained in custody 43 days during trial. He is in custody since date of judgment i.e. 10/01/2024. He has already undergone almost six months of jail incarceration. There is no

likelihood of early hearing of appeal in near future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent State opposes the application and prays for its rejection.

Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties, but without commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-

(1). The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited) forthwith;

(2). The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 22/07/2024

and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;

(3). The appellant shall ensure hearing of the appeal on the date fixed for such hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on his behalf, on the date notified for hearing.

In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order granting suspension of sentence shall become ineffective.

The Trial Court shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance to the appellant on any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].

Where the appellant does not appear on the date of his appearance before the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the Trial Court shall be authorized to issue non-bailable/bailable warrants to secure his attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court. The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of CrPC against such appellant and his surety without any reference to this Court and without any impediment of the order granting bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].

On arrest/surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellant shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to the Registry of this Court.

Accordingly, IA No. 3590 of 2024 stands allowed and disposed of. List for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) JUDGE

Prachi