Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pinki Burman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 May, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 12860 of 2023
(PINKI BURMAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-05-2024
Shri Neeraj Pathak - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri K.V.S. Rao - Panel Lawyer for the State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Record perused.
Admit.
Also heard on I.A.No.7990/2024, which is second application under
Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
the appellant. The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable
under Section 294, 427, 326 of Indian Penal Code alternative 307 and has been
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 months, 4 years and 1 year respectively with
fine of Rs.500/-, Rs.4000/- and Rs.500/- respectively with default stipulation.
Counsel for the appellant submits that previous application for
suspension of sentence was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 9.1.2024
in I.A No. 24137/2023. It is contended by the counsel that the appellant is a
lady aged about 32 years who is also mother of two minor children. It is
contended by the counsel that the present appellant has been falsely implicated
as the testimony of Prosecution Witness-1 is totally unreliable and considering
the period of incarceration of nine months already suffered by the appellant, she
deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is also contended by the counsel that while
dismissing the previous application this Court had extended liberty to the
appellant to renew the prayer after suffering some more period of incarceration.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State had opposed the prayer and
submitted that the injuries have been discussed by the Trial Court in paragraph
11 of the judgment, which reflect that the injured received grievous injuries
which were sufficient to cause death. Hence, considering the totality of
circumstances, no case for suspension of sentence is made out.
Heard the rival submissions and perused the case diary.
Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, a
perusal of statement of P.W. - 1 Gareebdas reflects that the present applicant
and the injured were sitting in a canteen and also had snacks and alter on the
present appellant caused injury to the person the deceased. The appellant is a
lady, aged about 32 years and has suffered incarceration of 9 months as of
now. The appellant is also mother of two minor children which is evident from
paragraph 55 of the judgment. Thus taking into consideration the totality of the
circumstances, this Court deem it proper to suspend the jail sentence of the
appellants. Accordingly, I.A.No.7990/2024 is allowed.
The execution of jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended subject to
depositing the fine amount, (if not already deposited) and on her furnishing a
personal bond to a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one
solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with a
further direction to appear before the trial Court on 02.07.2024 and also on
s uc h other dates, as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
C.C. as per rules.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
VKT
