Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pawan @ Lappu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 April, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRA-10216-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 10216 of 2024
(PAWAN @ LAPPU AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 07-04-2025
Shri Hritik Gupta - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Madhusudan Yadav - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Heard on I.A. No. 4106/2025, first application under Section 389 of
Cr.P.C./Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 moved on behalf of appellant No.1 - Pawan
alias Lappu seeking suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
The appellants stood convicted under Section 307/34 of IPC and sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- each, with
default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
08.08.2024, passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas, District
Dewas(M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.99/2023.
Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that the present appellant has
been falsely implicated in this matter alleging that co-accused caught hold of the
hands of Yuvraj Singh and appellant no.1 - Pawan @ Lappu assaulted Yuvraj with
knife on the abdomen. It is further alleged that appellant no.3 - Lakhan alias
Chonta chased Yuvraj and assaulted him with knife on his right hand. The injury
was found to be simple in nature. Learned counsel further submits that
impugned judgment passed by learned Trial Court is based on assumption,
conjectures and surmises. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in
convicting and sentencing the present appellant without appreciating the
prosecution evidence properly. Both the parties had amicably settled the dispute
2 CRA-10216-2024
which is reflected by Para No.5 of the impugned judgment. Learned trial Court
ignored these important aspects of the matter in convicting the present appellant
and sentencing him . On these grounds, learned counsel prays that the execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on
bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the suspension
application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence.
The appellant No.1 - Pawan alias Lappu continues to be in custody since
his arrest on 21.12.2022 till date. Thus, the appellant no.1 - Pawan alias Lappu has
undergone incarceration for more than 02 years and 04 months. There is no
likelihood of early hearing of appeal in near future. Other Co-accused Sunil, Ram
and Lakhan alias Chonta have been extended the benefit of suspension of
sentence vide orders dated 24.01.2025 and 25.02.2025. Upon hearing learned
Counsel for the parties, 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 the execution of remaining jail sentence of
appellant No.1 - Pawan alias Lappu 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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety 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 16.06.2025, 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
3 CRA-10216-2024
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 Cr.P.C 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, I.A. No.4106/2025, stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
sh
