Vakeel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 13439 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

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

                                    1
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           AT GWALIOR
                              CRA No. 7360 of 2022
                       (VAKEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 09-05-2024
         Shri Sushil Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant.

         Shri Kaushlendra Singh Tomar, learned Public Prosecutor for the
State.

         Heard on IA No.14708 of 2023, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant - Vakeel seeking suspension of

sentence and grant of bail.
         Appellant stood convicted under Section 302/149 of IPC and sentenced
to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, Section 148 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo one year RI with fine of Rs.5,00/- and Section 307/149 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years of RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-, with
default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.07.2022
passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jaura, District Morena (M.P.) in
Sessions Trial Nos.49, 181, 322/2018.
         Learned counsel for the appellant- Vakil submits that appellant is

convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 149 of IPC, Section
148 of IPC and Section 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC for his participation in
alleged offence. It was alleged that appellant Vakil caused injury to Ramnaresh
with luhangi. Learned counsel referring to Para 21 of the judgment contends that
four entry and exit wounds were found on dead body of Ramnaresh @ Bunty
during post mortem. No injury alleged to be caused by use of luhangi was
found by the Medical Officer. Further, no physical injury was found to have
been caused to complainant Rajpal by use of luhangi. It is a case of false over
                                     2
implication due to previous enmity between the parties over murder of
Ramkumar s/o co-accused Koak Singh by Rajpal and his brothers. One
luhangi was allegedly recovered at the instance of the appellant- Vakil, no
serological evidence to connect the luhangi with the alleged offence was
submitted. Learned trial Court ignored these aspects of the matter. Learned
counsel contends 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
ap p rec iating the   prosecution    evidence   properly.   There   are   material
contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. Learned counsel

also submits that appellant was in judicial custody for nine days during trial. He
was released on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty so granted to
him. He is undergoing sentence of imprisonment since the date of judgment i.e.
30.07.2022. 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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac 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 07/08/2024 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. 14708 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

       (VIVEK RUSIA)                                  (SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
          JUDGE                                                 JUDGE

    Vijay

            DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA



VIJAY
            PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH
            COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
            GWALIOR,

2.5.4.20=663cb09dd950bfc3ea7ed4f02d 97ddae5364f1d4b042dbc59921b76e81

TRIPATHI 2d2d6b, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, serialNumber=58392D8C4E7C9693BFEE B5B46B3CA006F1127E89008952BBEC52 8CE4D82551BD, cn=VIJAY TRIPATHI Date: 2024.05.10 17:10:42 +05'30'