Madhya Pradesh High Court
Charan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 February, 2025
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
1 CRA-10998-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 10998 of 2024
(CHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 18-02-2025
Mr. G.P. Chaurasiya - Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Samar Ghuraiya - Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Admit.
Also heard on I.A.No.23114/2024, which is first application filed on
behalf of the appellant No.1-Charan Singh for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail.
Appellant No.1 - Charan Singh has been convicted by the trial Court
under Section 307/34 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years
with fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the trial Court has not
properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record
while convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offences. It is contended by
the counsel that the present appellant is not the person who fired gunshot. It
is set forth by the prosecution that co-accused Sunil, who happened to be
husband of complainant fired gunshot and as per the prosecution, appellant -
Charan Singh caught hold the complainant which facilitated the co-accused
to fire gunshot. It is contended by the counsel that prosecutrix was examined
as PW-5 during the course of trial and the prosecutrix in paragraph - 1 of her
examination-in-chief did not even mention the name of the present appellant
2 CRA-10998-2024
and no allegations have been leveled. However, she was declared hostile and
when the leading questions were asked, she was constrained to admit that the
appellant caught hold her. It is contended by the counsel that other eye-
witnesses are turned hostile, which is evident from paragraph - 8 of the
judgment and as the appellant has not caused any injury nor there is recovery
of any kind of weapon, therefore, he be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and
submits that the appellant has been rightly convicted by the trial Court,
therefore, sentence of the appellant should not be suspended.
Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record.
On perusal of record it reflects that present appellant is not the person
who fired gunshot and as per the prosecution, appellant - Charan Singh
caught hold the complainant which facilitated the co-accused to fire
gunshot. This appeal is of the year 2024 and final hearing of this appeal will
take time.
In view of the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to
be a fit case to suspend the jail sentence of appellant No.1 - Charan Singh
and to release him on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merit of
the case, the application is allowed.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of the appellant shall remain
suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before
3 CRA-10998-2024
the trial Court concerned on 23.06.2025 and on such other dates as may be
fixed by the trial Court in that regard during pendency of this appeal.
It is made clear that if the appellant is not required in any other case,
he be released forthwith subject to deposit of fine amount.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
bj/-
