Nandlal @ Golu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 14872 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Nandlal @ Golu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 May, 2024

Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                       CRA No. 761 of 2020
                                       (NANDLAL @ GOLU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 17-05-2024
                                 Shri Jagat Kumar Dehariya - Advocate for the appellants.

                                 Shri Soumya Dixit - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.8429/2024, repeat (third) application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.1 Nandlal @ Golu.

T h e appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- and under Section 201 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

His first application has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 04.05.2022 (I.A.No.624 of 2021) and second application was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order 13.12.2023 (I.A.No.17585 of 2022).

Learned counsel for the appellants, after taking this Court through the evidence on record, submits that there is no legal evidence against appellant.

Identity of dead body recovered in the case is not clearly established. Independent witnesses to recovery have turned hostile. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that learned trial Court has erred in convicting and sentencing appellant. Learned trial Court has convicted appellant on the basis of circumstantial evidence, whereas, chain of circumstances is not complete in the instant case. Early hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Therefore, it has been prayed that remaining jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State, on the other hand has opposed the application.

We have gone through the evidence on record and have examined the same. We have also gone through para-33 of impugned judgment. In view of overall evidence on record, especially, circumstances pointed out by trial Court in para-33 of impugned judgment, we deem it not proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant.

Hence, I.A.No.8429/2024 filed by appellant is dismissed. List the matter for final hearing in due course.

                                (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)                          (ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
                                       JUDGE                                           JUDGE

                          vai