Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinay Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 243 of 2023
(VINAY SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 30-05-2024
Shyri Anand Kumar Gupta- learned counsel for the appellants.
Dr. Anjali Gyanani- learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
IA No. 2659/2024, an application for urgent hearing is taken up,
considered and allowed.
Heard o n IA No.2660 of 2024, first application under Section 389(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.3 Banwari.
Present appellant stood convicted under Section 148, 302/149 and
323/149 (injured Rameshwar) of IPC and sentenced to undergo one year
rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/-, Life Imprisonment with fine of
Rs.2000/- and six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- with
default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
14/11/2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Raghogarh District Guna
(M.P.) in ST No.34/2019.
A s per prosecution story, on 25/10/2024 complainant- Rameshwar
(P.W.1) lodged the report that he alongwith Mohan Singh and Dilip were going
on motorcycle. When they reached near garden of teak (Sagwan), Tulsiram
Gurjar and Vinay Gurjar armed with Farsi and Banwari, Kailash and Indar
armed with Lathi apprehended their way and assaulted them. Tulsiram and
Vinay assaulted Mohan by means of Farshi on his head and blood started
oozing out. Thereafter, Kailash, Indar Singh, Banwari assaulted Rameshwar by
means of Lathi. Thereafter, they ran away. They were sent to Hospital. Mohan
Singh died due to injuries. PS Raghogarh District Guna registered FIR at Crime
No.366/2014 for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and
302 of the IPC. Upon completion of investigation including recording of
statements, collection of evidence and necessary formalities, challan was filed.
The Sessions Court on appreciation of evidence placed on record convicted
and sentenced the present appellant as mentioned above.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the present appellant, while
taking exception to the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence
submits that all the accused are real brothers and only allegation against the
present appellant is that he caused injury on non vital part of the body of injured
Rameshwar (P.W.1). Deceased-Mohan died due to injury caused by other
accused persons. He was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty
so granted to him. It is further submitted that the appeal being of 2023 is not
likely to be decided early in the near future. On these grounds, learned counsel
submits that the present appellant may be extended the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned State Counsel, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced coupled with the fact that
the appeal which is of the year 2023 is not likely to be decided in the near
future, in the obtaining facts and circumstances, we are of the view that
appellant No.3 is entitled to the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail.
Accordingly, IA No.2660/2024, stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of appellant No.3 Banwari shall remain suspended during
pendency of the present appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to
verification of the factum of depositing the fine amount and on his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. Appellant
No.3 is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on
24.09.2024 and thereafter, on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this
behalf.
Accordingly, the said IA stands allowed and disposed of.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE JUDGE
Prachi
