Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dilip Patwa vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 May, 2024
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 11241 of 2023
(DILIP PATWA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 29-05-2024
Shri Shashi Kumar Khare, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Lokendra Shrivastava, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
Heard on IA No. 16653/2023, an application for exemption from typed
copy of documents.
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
Also heard on IA No. 16652 of 2023, first application under Section
389(1) Cr. P.C. moved on behalf of appellant - Dilip Patwa seeking suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 304 (two counts) of IPC and
sentenced to undergo seven years RI with fine of Rs.500/- on each count, under
Section 308 of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years RI with fine of
Rs.500/- and under Section 25(1)(1-B)(A) and Section 27 of Arms Act and
sentenced to undergo three years RI with fine of Rs.500/- for each of the
offence, with default stipulation, vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 06.06.2023 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge,
Seonda, Datia in ST No.92/2018.
As per the report received from the office of Superintendent, District Jail,
Datia, appellant - Dilip Patwa has already undergone imprisonment for three
year and nine months.
Learned Counsel for appellant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in
the application, submits that the impugned judgment passed b y learned Trial
Court is based on assumption, conjectures and surmises. The learned Trial
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 30-05-2024
10:03:02 AM
2
Court has committed an error in convicting and sentencing the present appellant
without appreciating the prosecution evidence properly. There are material
contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses. The appellant was
on bail during trial. He has not misused the liberty granted to him. Fine amount
has already been deposited by the appellant. The appellant has already suffered
jail incarceration of three year and nine months. There is no likelihood of early
hearing of appeal in near future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that
execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may
be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent State opposes the
application and prays for its rejection.
Up o n hearing learned Counsel for the parties, on consideration of
custody period, but without commenting upon rival contentions touching merits
of the case, this Court is of the view that application deserves to be allowed. It
is, accordingly directed that execution of remaining jail sentence of appellant
shall remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged
on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of Trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-
(1). The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2). The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 12/08/2024
and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3). The appellant shall ensure hearing of the appeal on the date fixed
for such hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on his behalf,
on the date notified for hearing.
In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order
granting suspension of sentence shall become ineffective.
The Trial Court shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance
to the appellant on any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII
Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
Where the appellant does not appear on the date of his appearance
before the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the
Trial Court shall be authorized to issue non-bailable/bailable warrants to secure
his attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court. The Trial Court
shall also proceed under Section 446 of CrPC against such appellant and his
surety without any reference to this Court and without any impediment of the
order granting bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court
Rules, 2008].
On arrest/surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellant shall be
forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to
the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, IA No. 16652 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Vijay
