Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anil Sharan Doshwa vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 April, 2025
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1 CRA-8540-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 8149 of 2024
(BHUJBAL SINGH MARABI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
CRA/8501/2024, CRA/8540/2024, CRA/9757/2024
Dated : 02-04-2025
Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate - with Shri Amardeep Seth,
Advocate, Shri Madan Singh and Shri R. S. Rathore - Advocates for the
appellants in their respective criminal appeals.
Shri Himanshu Soni - Panel Lawyer for the State.
Reserved on : 26.03.2025
Pronounced on: 02.04.2025
ORDER
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Heard on I.A. Nos.17406/2024, 18113/2024, 18193/2024 and 20721/2024 ,
which are first applications filed under Section 430(1) OF Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita 2023, for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail on
behalf of appellants Bhujbal Singh Marabi, Mathura Prajapati, Anil Sharan
Doshwa and Rooplal Puri respectively.
The appellants herein were convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 489(b) of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of
Rs.2,000/- and Section 489 (c) of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5
years with fine of Rs.2,000/- respectively, with default stipulations, vide
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11/07/2024 passed by
First Additional Sessions Judge, Anuppur, in S.T. No.23/2018.
2 CRA-8540-2024
For the sake of convenience, all the four applications for suspension of
sentence filed on behalf of appellants of each of the aforesaid criminal
appeals are being disposed of by a common order.
All the four appellants have been convicted for having in their possession
fake currency notes. According to prosecution, one currency note in the
denomination of Rs.500/- was allegedly recovered from the possession of
Mathura Prajapati under seizure memo, Ex.P-5, 141 fake currency notes were
recovered from the possession of appellant Bhujbal Singh Marabi under
seizure memo (Ex.P-6), 44 currency notes were seized from the possession
of appellant Rooplal under seizure memo (Ex.P-7) and 197 currency notes
were seized from the possession of appellant Anil Sharan under seizure
memo (Ex.P-16) but in none of the seizure memos fact of putting them under
a sealed cover is mentioned nor the specimen of seal used is affixed on these
seizure memos.
The appellants have also relied upon the statements of seizure officer D.
K. Dahiya (P.W.20) who has admitted that at the time of seizure of currency
notes under Exs.P-6, P-7 and P-16 he did not put them in any sealed cover
nor affixed the specimen seal on the seizure memos. Reference has also been
made to the statement of Seizure Officer K. N. Banjare (P.W.19) who had
prepared the seizure memo (Ex.P-5) regarding recovery of one fake note
from the possession of appellant Mathura Prajapati and the fact of putting the
seized note under sealed cover is missing even in that seizure memo but this
witness in para 18 has claimed that he had put the currency note in a sealed
cover and had sent it in sealed state to Branch Manager, SBI, Jaithari, under
3 CRA-8540-2024
letter marked as Ex.P-46. The letter sent by him has been perused. Neither in
the said letter i.e. Ex.P-46 nor in the received report, the fact of sending the
fake currency note in a sealed cover and its receipt in the Bank in a sealed
state is mentioned.
Based on these grounds, it is argued that the prosecution has not been able
to establish that the currency notes sent for examination were only those
which were allegedly recovered from the appellants and since they were not
sealed at the time of seizure, therefore it was wrong to convict the appellants
for having been in possession of fake currency notes. A request has,
therefore, been made to allow the applications.
State has opposed the applications on the ground that appellants have been
rightly convicted for dishonestly having in their possession fake currency
notes and this fact has been established by corroborating evidence. Thus, a
request has been made to dismiss the application.
Counsel for all the parties have been heard and the record has been
perused.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the parties and on
examination of evidence available on record, but without commenting on
merits of the case, the applications are allowed .
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of the
appellants shall remain suspended and they shall be released on bail for
4 CRA-8540-2024
securing their presence before the trial Court concerned on 08.07.2025 and
on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this
appeal.
Accordingly, the aforesaid I.As. stand allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
ps
