Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deewan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 10616 of 2019
(DEEWAN AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 31-05-2024
Shri P.K. Shrivastava - Advocate for the appellants No.2
Shri Pavan Singh Raghuvanshi - Public Prosecutor for the State.
Heard on I.A. No.10264 of 2024, fourth repeat application under Section
389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail
filed on behalf of the appellant No.2 Kamlesh. His earlier applications were
dismissed as withdrawn.
The appellant No.2 has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Sections 396/120B, 302/149 of IPC and sections 11/13 of M.P.D.V.P.K. Act,
307/149 and 225/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with
fine of Rs.2,000/-, ten years RI with fine of Rs.2000/-, 3 years RI with fine of
Rs. 1000/-, respectively, with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction
a n d order of sentence dated 20.11.2019 passed by Special Judge
(M.P.D.V.P.K. Act) Sabalgarh, District Morena in Special ST No.200031 of
2015.
Learned counsel for the present appellant, while taking exception to the
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, submits that the
Sessions Court has not appreciated the evidence placed on record in correct
perspective. The judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. It is further
submitted that the deceased died due to the gun-shot injury fired by Ravi and
apart from that no other accused caused any injury. He has been convicted
merely he was present along with other accused persons in the train. It is further
submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 01-06-2024
12:02:32 PM
2
case. It is further submitted that co-accused Deewan Singh has already been
granted benefit of suspension of sentence vide order dated 10.05.2024. It is
further submitted that the appeal being of 2019 is not likely to be decided 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.
Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposed the prayer and prayed
for dismissal of the application.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, 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 appellants.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, though this Court refrains
from commenting upon rival contentions so advanced touching merits of the
case, regard being had to the fact that similarly situated co-accused co-accused
Deewan Singh has already been granted benefit of suspension of sentence vide
order dated 10.05.2024 coupled with the fact that the appeal which is of the
year 2019 is not likely to be decided in the near future, in the obtaining facts and
circumstances, we are of the view that present appellant is entitled to the benefit
of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.10264 of 2024 stands allowed. The execution of
remaining jail sentence of the appellant No.2 Kamlesh is hereby suspended and
it is ordered that the appellant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to
depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited) with a further direction to
appear before the Registry of this Court on 12.08.2024 and also on such other
dates, as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard during the
pendency of this appeal.
I.A. stands disposed of.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
pwn*
