Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shyam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2025
1 CRA-10965-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 10965 of 2024
(SHYAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 14-02-2025
Appellant by Shri Ashish Gupta - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Virendra Khadav -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Heard on the question of admission.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.16149 of 2024 , first 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 appellant Shyam S/o Nathusingh Choudhary .
Vide judgment and order dated 03.09.2024 delivered in Sessions Trial
No.08 of 2023 by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Sonkatch,
District Dewas (MP), the appellant stands convicted under Sections 420, 467,
468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment under each section for a period of five years with fine of
Rs.2,000/- with usual default stipulation.
As per prosecution story, a written application was filed that the
appellant has issued forged voter ID from his photo studio / shop where he
was working, therefore, FIR was lodged and the matter was investigated.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this
2 CRA-10965-2024
impugned judgment submits that appellant is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this matter. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence
in its right perspective. Learned counsel submits that the appellant has been
made a scapegoat by the owner of the shop, who was actually using laptop
for preparing the alleged forged voter ID Card, but just before the
commission of raid, user name and password has been changed and the
appellant, who was a worker there, has falsely been implicated in the case for
this, learned counsel has invited the attention of this Court towards paragraph
No.33 of the impugned judgment. He further submits that the appellant has
suffered incarceration of two years one month and twenty one days out of
total five years rigorous imprisonment. Impugned judgment suffers from
surmises and conjectures and has been passed ignoring serious anomalies.
The appeal being of the year 2024 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.
Looking to the aforesaid factual backdrop, coupled with the fact that
possibility of final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak and also
3 CRA-10965-2024
looking to the period of incarceration, 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 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 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 -
(1) The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 25/03/2025
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].
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
4 CRA-10965-2024
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 allowed and disposed off.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
IA No.20381 of 2024 , an application for urgent hearing during
vacation, stands disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
