Braj Kishore Tyagi @ Beenu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15691 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Braj Kishore Tyagi @ Beenu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 May, 2024

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                                1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT GWALIOR
                                                        CRR No. 2371 of 2024
                                   (BRAJ KISHORE TYAGI @ BEENU AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                           Dated : 27-05-2024
                                   Shri G.S. Sharma - Advocate for the petitioners.

                                   Shri Lokendra Shrivastava - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No. 9696of 2024, an application under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the petitioners.

The revision has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 397 r.w. 401 of the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment dated 10.05.2024 in

Cr.A.No.192/2023 passed by Sessions Judge, Bhind (M.P.) affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 04.11.2023 passed in RCT No.270/2018 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lahar, District Bhind (M.P.) whereby, petitioners have been convicted and sentenced under Sections 323/34 (two counts) of IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months with fine of Rs.500/-, under Sections 325/34 of IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the Court below have wrongly appreciated the evidence and convicted the petitioners. It is further

submitted that the petitioners were on bail during trial and they never misused the liberty. They have already served incarceration of 17 days out of total sentence of one year. It is further submitted that the fine amount has already been deposited. Therefore, it has been prayed that the petitioners be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/State opposed the application for suspension of sentence and grant

of bail filed on behalf of the petitioners and prayed for its rejection.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the application (I.A.No. 9696 of 2024) is allowed.

It is directed that the petitioner be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond by each of the petitioner in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The petitioners shall now appear before the Registry o f this Court 10.09.2024 and on all other dates which may be given by the Office for their appearance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

vpn