Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raja @ Ezaj Musalman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 May, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 3667 of 2022
(RAJA @ EZAJ MUSALMAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 21-05-2024
Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Shri Siddharth Bendel for
appellant.
Shri Malhar Dixit - Panel Lawyer for respondent-State.
Record of the Court below is received.
Heard on I.A. No.10986/2024 which is repeat 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 by the trial Court under Section 307 of
IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.100/- with default
stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that previous application was
dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 09.01.2024 and after that the appellant
has also suffered another 5 months in custody and thus, total period of
incarceration is 2 years and 6 months. It is contended by the counsel that the
testimonies of Dr. Vinod Kumar (PW-10) and Dr. Rajesh Batra (PW-11) reflect
that the injuries were not on any vital part nor were dangerous to life. It is also
contended by the counsel that even the injured Shiv Pratap Singh (PW-1)
himself stated in his cross-examination that he did not see that who fired the
gunshot on him as his back was towards the side from the gunshot was fired. It
is thus, contended by the counsel that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on
bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and
submitted that considering the nature of injuries which has been discussed by
the trial Court in paragraphs 53 and 54 of the judgment, no case for grant of bail
is made out.
Heard the submission and perused the record.
A perusal of record reflects that the incident in the present case had taken
place in the month of March 2015 and the appellant has suffered 2 years and 6
months in custody as of now. A perusal of testimony of Shiv Pratap Singh
(PW-1) reflects that though he supported that the present appellant was there
along with the other co-accused but he admitted in his cross-examination that he
could not see who had fired the gun shot.
Thus, considering the totality of the circumstances and the fact that the
appellant has already suffered 2 years and 6 months custody as of now, this
Court finds it to be a fit case to suspend the custodial sentence of the appellant
and to release him on bail, therefore, this application is allowed.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of appellant shall remain
suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before the
trial Court concerned on 15.07.2024 and on such other dates as may be fixed
by that Court in this regard during pendency of this appeal.
The appeal is already admitted for final hearing, so it be listed for final
hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
mn
