Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjay Goud vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 May, 2024
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 5492 of 2024
(SANJAY GOUD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 14-05-2024
Shri Prasoon Maheswari - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri A.K.Shukla- 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.8847 of 2024, first application under Section
389(1) Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of appellant- Sanjay Gaud seeking
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 354 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default
stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27th of
April, 2024 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Gwalior in SC ATR No. 323
of 2021.
Learned Counsel for appellant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in
the application, submits that the impugned judgment passed b y 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. The jail sentence of
the appellant has been suspended by learned trial Court, under Section 389(3)
of the Cr.P.C for a period of one month i.e. till 26th of May, 2024. 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 12.08.2024
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.8847 of 2024 stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Vijay
