Madhya Pradesh High Court

Manoj Batham vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 April, 2025

Author: Sanjay Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Dwivedi

                                                               1                               CRA-10149-2023
                                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                         AT JABALPUR
                                                        CRA No. 10149 of 2023
                                              (MANOJ BATHAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )


                           Dated : 01-04-2025
                                 Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Shri Eshaan Datt - Advocate for
                           the appellant.
                                 Shri Amit Pandey - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Record of the trial Court be called for.

Heard on I.A. No.3969/2025, which is the third application filed on behalf

of the appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Vide impugned judgment dated 19.07.2023 passed by the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, in S.T. No.400729/2013, the appellant has been convicted under Section 409 (on 40 counts) of I.P.C. and sentenced thereunder to suffer R.I. for 10 years (on 40 counts) with fine of Rs.2,000/- (on each count), with default stipulations.

Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the earlier two applications filed on behalf of the appellant were dismissed as withdrawn. As per the case of the prosecution, the appellant being a bank employee, though collected the amount from the account holders but not deposited the same in their respective

accounts. He submits that the present appellant has been made accused only because the offence started from his end but ultimately these entries have been checked by the other officers, however, they have not been made accused. He submits that even otherwise the entries used to be checked everyday, those have been verified by the higher officers and there was no fault found in the verification of entries shown by the present appellant. He further submits that the Court has

2 CRA-10149-2023 not properly appreciated the evidence. He submits that because of the conviction made against the appellant, he has lost his job. He also submits that the period of incarceration of the appellant is more than two years, this appeal is of year 2023 and will take time to be heard finally. Upon these grounds, it is prayed that the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail may be considered.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-State adopting the previous objection, opposes the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. He submits that looking to the nature of crime and sentence awarded against the appellant, the period of custody is not too much, therefore, the application may not be considered.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, looking to the nature of crime and the facts that the appellant

was a bank employee who lost his job and is in jail since last more than two years, I am inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I.A. No.3969/2025 is allowed.

Accordingly, it is directed that remaining jail sentence awarded to the appellant shall remain suspended and he be released on bail subject to his depositing the amount of fine, if already not deposited, and upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with a surety bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 26.06.2025 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard.

Thus, I.A. No.3969/2025 is allowed and disposed of.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE

3 CRA-10149-2023 Prachi