[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sharif@Bhaijaan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 December, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1 CRA-14247-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 14247 of 2024
(SUNIL MARATHA @ PAKIJ @ PRAVEEN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
CRA/12506/2024
Dated : 10-12-2025
Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta - Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Surendra Kumar Gupta - Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Heard on IA No.11273 of 2025 , first application under Section 430 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 389 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973) filed on behalf of appellant - Sunil Maratha @
Pakij @ Praveen for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence.
The present appellant stands convicted under Sections 302 read with
Section 34 and 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to
undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- and RI for 3 years with
fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.
Also heard on IA No.3145 of 2025 , first application under Section 430
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 389 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973) filed on behalf of appellant - Sharif @ Bhaijaan
for grant of bail and suspension of remaining jail sentence.
Appellant - Sharif @ Bhaijaan stands convicted under Sections 302
read with Section 34 and 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 & Section
25(1-B)(A) of Arms Act, 1959 sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with
fine of Rs.2,000/-, RI for 3 years with fine of Rs.500/- and RI for 4 years
2 CRA-14247-2024
with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations.
Prosecution case in nutshell is that on 17.01.2013 appellants Sharif @
Bhaijaan and Sunil Maratha @ Pakij @ Praveen had gone to deceased
Narendra for purchasing the land. On 17.01.2013 when Narendra was
irrigating his field at about 12:30 p.m. one Vinay came there with two
quarters of liquor and glass. It was informed by deceased Narendra to Mithun
that electric pump motor is switched off and asked to switch it on. At the
same time, accused Vinay and Sanju fired a bullet in the head of the
deceased. Mithun chased the assailants, but could not catch them as they fled
away. Deceased was taken to Aurobindo hospital where he was declared
dead. Incident was registered at Crime No. 33/2013 under Section 307 r/w 34
of IPC and thereafter Section 302 of IPC was invoked.
Learned counsel for the appellants, taking exception to the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence, submits that the present
appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. They
have suffered incarceration for more than 10 years. The judgment has been
passed on conjectures and surmises, keeping aside the material
contradictions and omissions in the prosecution case. The appellants have
fair chances of success in this appeal, which is not going to be heard finally
in near future, looking to the huge pendency. Hence, learned counsel prays
for allowing the IA and granting suspension of remaining jail sentence and
bail to the appellants.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent / State has
opposed the prayer and prays for dismissal of the interlocutory applications,
3 CRA-14247-2024
but did not dispute the period of custody.
Heard and considered the rival submissions raised at bar and perused
the record.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the period of custody and bleak chance of final hearing of the
appeals, we are of the considered view that it is a fit case for grant of
suspension of sentence and bail in favour of the present appellants.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
IA No.11273 of 2025 and IA No.3145 of 2025 stand allowed. The
execution of remaining jail sentence of appellants - Sunil Maratha @ Pakij
@ Praveen and Sharif @ Bhaijaan shall remain suspended during the
pendency of the appeal and they be released on bail upon their furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each
with separate solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial
Court and on depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited); and with
a further direction to appear before the Registry of this Court on
09.03.2026 and thereafter, on all subsequent dates as may be fixed by the
Registry in this regard during the pendency of the appeal.
By way of abundant caution, the appellants are also directed to mark
their presence before the concerned police station on first Monday of every
month between 12.00 Noon to 2.00 p.m.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
4 CRA-14247-2024
JUDGE JUDGE
soumya
