Madhya Pradesh High Court
Subhash Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 August, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 9537 of 2024
(SUBHASH SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 26-08-2025
Shri Rajkumar Singh Kushwaha-Advocate for appellants.
Shri B.P.S. Chauhan-Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla- Advocate along with Shri Kushagra
Shukla-Advocate for complainant.
Heard on I.A.No.10553/2025, first application under Section 430(1)
Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
appellant No.2-Deepak Sharma.
Present appellant is facing sentence by virtue of judgment dated
26/07/2024 passed by First Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhind, District Bhind in ST No.258/2013; whereby, he has
been convicted and sentenced as under:-
Section Imprisonment Fine
302 of IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.50,000/- with default
stipulation.
It is the submission of counsel for appellants that trial Court erred in
convicting and awarding jail sentence to present appellant. He already
suffered around 7 years of incarceration as pre and post trial confinement.
This is a case of cross FIRs. A case against complainant side was also
registered under Section 307 of IPC and they were convicted. There is
material contradictions and omissions in the statements of prosecution
witness Pappu alias Rajesh (PW-1). In this regard, he refers Para-5 of his
cross-examination. Other witnesses did not support the story of prosecution
and declared hostile. Initially, as per statement of witnesses under Section
161 Cr.P.C., complainant side was described as aggressor. However, later on,
witnesses deposed that appellant side was aggressor. Such contradictions
render the case vulnerable. He relied upon judgment of Apex Court in
Bhagwan Swaroop Vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 1992 SC 675 and
Kashmiri Lal & Others Vs State of Punjab reported in 1996 (10) SCC
471. Moreover, present appellant has good case on merits and hearing of
appeal shall take some time. Fine amount has already been deposited. He
undertakes to abide by the terms and conditions as imposed by this Court.
Under such circumstances, learned counsel for appellants prays for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present appellant.
Counsel for respondent/State opposed the prayer and submits that not
only Pappu alias Rajesh (PW-1) deposed against present appellant but
another witness Shivpoojan Sharma (PW-12), who was the author of Dehati
Nalishi also deposed against present appellant. Said witnesses refer the role
of present appellant in specific terms whereby he inflicted gun shot injuries
to deceased Harendra. Appellant used the weapon of his uncle Subhash
Sharma. He is having criminal antecedents of four cases in which one case is
of Sectioin 302 of IPC and another case is of Section 307 of IPC; therefore,
he is a habitual offender. Looking to the eyewitnesses account and period of
custody which is only 7 years, he prayed for dismissal of the application.
Counsel for complainant opposed the application and prayed for its
rejection with submission that appellant was the main assailant who inflicted
gunshot injuries to deceased Harendra. Said injury is corroborated by
Doctor Pulak Jaiswani (PW-9).
Heard counsel for parties at length and perused the record.
This is a case where present appellant - Deepak Sharma is facing
conviction for offence under Section 302 of IPC. As per eyewitness account
Pappu alias Rajesh (PW-1) and Shivpoojan Sharma (PW-12), present
appellant caused gunshot injury to deceased which is duly corroborated by
post mortem report. He suffered 7 years of incarceration. At this stage,
looking to the nature of allegations and the evidence surfaced against him,
no case is made out for grant of suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, I.A.No.10553/2025 sans merits and is hereby
dismissed.
It is made clear that observations on facts, if any, are only for the
purpose of deciding the instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on merits
of appeal.
(ANAND PATHAK) (PUSHPENDRA YADAV)
JUDGE JUDGE
(Dubey)
