Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dilip vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 February, 2025
1 CRA-1712-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1712 of 2022
(DILIP AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 05-02-2025
Shri Bhaskar Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Surendra Kumar Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.18814/2024, fourth application under Section 430 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf
of the appellants no.1-Dilip Chouhan S/o Bhavsingh Chouhan and appellant
no.3-Dhyan @ Dhyansingh S/o Shri Mahkam. First application was
dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.07.2022, second application was
dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh after completion of half of
the sentence vide order dated 22.11.2023 and third application was dismissed
as withdraw vide order dated 28.02.2024.
The appellants stands convicted under Section 395 read with Section
397 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 7 years R.I. each with fine of Rs.3000/-
each with usual default stipulation.
After arguing the case for some time, learned counsel for the appellant
does not wish to press I.A.No.18814/2024 with regard to appellant no.1-
Dilip Chouhan S/o Bhavsingh Chouhan with liberty to revive his prayer after
completion of half of the sentence.
Prayer is allowed.
2 CRA-1712-2022
Accordingly, I.A.No.18814/2024 is dismissed as not pressed with
regard to appellant no.1- Dilip Chouhan S/o Bhavsingh Chouhan with liberty
as aforesaid.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this
impugned judgment submits that appellant no.3-Dhyan @ Dhyansingh S/o
Shri Mahkam is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter.
Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective. He has
suffered jail sentence of 3 years and 8 months. Appellant no.2- Suresh was
granted suspension for twin reasons that he was suffering from colonial
disease along with incarceration of two years. There are material
contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Impugned
judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures and has been passed
ignoring serious infirmities and anomalies. The appeal being of the year 2022
is not likely to be heard finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour
of the appellant. Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case and appellant no.3-Dhyan @ Dhyansingh S/o Shri
3 CRA-1712-2022
Mahkam has completed half of the sentence, coupled with the fact that
possibility of final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak, without
expressing any conclusive opinion on merits, I find it to be a fit case to
suspend the remaining custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, application with regard to appellant no.3-Dhyan @
Dhyansingh S/o Shri Mahkam is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount,
if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of
the appeal is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellant no.3-Dhyan @
Dhyansingh S/o Shri Mahkam be released on bail on his furnishing personal
bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned 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 24/03/2025
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 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].
4 CRA-1712-2022
Where the appellant do 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. /
Section 491 of BNSS, 2023 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, the I.A. stands partly allowed and disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
RJ
