Madhya Pradesh High Court
Tarun@ Kittu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 13782 of 2023
(TARUN@ KITTU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 28-05-2024
Shri Satyam Agrawal - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri S.M. Patel - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.25901 of 2023, this is an application under Section
389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to appellant
Tarun @ Kittu, pending the appeal.
Appellant alongwith co-accused has been convicted for commission of
offence under Sections 399, 400, 402 of IPC & Section 25(1-B)(b) of the Arms
Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years & to pay fine of
Rs.500/-, R.I. for 5 years & to pay fine of Rs.500/-, R.I. for 3 years & to pay
fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for one year & to pay fine of Rs.500/- respectively
with default stipulations vide judgment dated 12.06.2023 passed in ST No.-
67/2023 (State of M.P. vs. Ankit Kuchbandiya and others) by the Sessions
Judge, Sehore (M.P.). All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has been
erroneously convicted by learned trial Court as it has not properly appreciated
the evidence of witnesses on record. It is submitted that evidence of
prosecution witnesses is full of omissions and contradictions and such
omissions and contradictions have not been considered in right perspective by
the learned trial Court. It is further submitted that seizure witnesses &
memorandum witnesses of the present case have turned hostile and have not
supported the prosecution case. It is also submitted that co-appellants viz.
Ankit Kuchbandiya & Sanjay Valmiki have already been enlarged on bail by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.11.2023 passed in CRA
No.10536 of 2023 & CRA No.9697 of 2023 respectively. Appellant has fair
chances to succeed in appeal. There is no possibility of coming of this appeal
for hearing in near future. Therefore, if the execution of jail sentence of appellant
is not suspended, the purpose of filing this appeal would become futile. Thus, it
is prayed that custodial jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended and he
may be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the
material available on record.
Having taken into consideration all the facts & circumstances of the case
and the fact that there is bleak possibility of hearing this appeal in near future, I
deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant, pending
the appeal. Consequently, I.A. No.25901 of 2023 is allowed.
It is directed that the execution of jail sentence of appellant - Tarun @
Kittu is hereby suspended subject to depositing the entire fine amount, if not
already deposited. It is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his
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 25.10.2024
and also on such other dates, as may be fixed by that Court in this regard
during the pendency of this appeal.
List this case for final hearing in due course alongwith connected matters.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
@shish
