Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Hemlata Rathor vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 8122 of 2019
(SMT. HEMLATA RATHOR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-05-2024
Shri Rinku Rathore-Advocate for appellant.
Shri Rajesh Shukla- Additional Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Heard o n I.A.No.7904/2024, which is third repeat application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail
sentence on behalf of appellant-Smt. Hemlata Rathore.
Present appellant stands convicted under Section 302/120-B of IPC and
sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- with usual
default stipulation vide judgment dated 29/04/2019 passed in ST No.246/2018
by Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court No.3 (Electricity Act), Gwalior
(M.P.).
As per prosecution story, complainant Laxman Singh lodged a missing
person report on 18/03/2018 to the effect that his son Sanjay Rathore is missing
since 17/03/2018. Thereafter, his dead body was recovered which was
identified by complainant Laxman Singh and his son Bhupendra Rathore. Then,
the complainant expressed doubt on his daughter-in-law Hemlata (present
appellant) and Akash Jatav (co-accused) that they committed murder of his son
Sanjay Rathore (Deceased) by causing injury on neck and throwing stone on his
face due to illicit relationship between the accused persons. Accordingly, case
has been registered and investigation was set in motion. After completion of
investigation, Challan was filed. The Sessions Court after due consideration of
the evidence available on record, convicted the present appellant along with co-
accused Hemlata.
Learned counsel for the present appellant submits that appellant is an
innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this matter. There are
lots of contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses. It is further submitted that appellant is a lady and has already
suffered jail incarceration for the period of more than 5 years. She is permanent
resident of District - Gwalior (M.P.). There is strong case in favour of the
appellant. Since appeal is of the year 2019, final disposal of the appeal will take
considerable long time. Under these circumstances, he prays that the application
be allowed and the remaining jail sentence of the appellant be suspended till
final disposal of the appeal.
P e r contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the
application for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection by submitting
that the trial Court after due consideration of the evidence available on record,
convicted the appellant. Hence, she is not entitled to grant benefit of suspension
of sentence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record with
due care.
As per prosecution story, present appellant who is the wife of deceased
Sanjay Rathore had illicit relationship with co-accused Akash Jatav and because
of which, the deceased Sanjay Rathore threatened the co-accused Akash Jatav
due to which he called him and committed murder of deceased Sanjay Rathore.
Circumstances which have been proved by the prosecution are the last seen of
co-accused Akash Jatav with the deceased, call exchanges between them &
motive. That apart, Sunil Kuswaha (PW-2) has clearly stated in his statement
that on 17/03/2018, at about 03:00 p.m., he saw the present appellant along with
deceased Sanjay Rathore on a motorcycle in village Sonjna. Hence, it is a case
of circumstantial evidence.
In view of above, at this stage, we are not inclined to grant benefit of
suspension of sentence to present appellant.
Accordingly I.A.No.7904/2024 stands dismissed.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE JUDGE
(Dubey)
