Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prakash vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-7725-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 7725 of 2021
(PRAKASH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 27-02-2025
Shri Nilesh Sharma - advocate for the appellant.
Shri Sonal Gupta - Government Advocate for the respondents State.
Heard on I.A.No.694/2025, which is first application under Section 389(1)
of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of custodial sentence on behalf of appellant No.2
Dinesh S/o Thavariya.
The appellant No.2 stands convicted vide judgment dated 18/11/2021 passed
by I Additional Sessions Judge, Barwani District Barwani (M.P.) in S.T.
No.86/2018 under Sections 396, 302/149 and 201of the IPC and has been
sentenced to under go Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, Life
Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- and 02 years RI with fine of Rs.500/-
respectively with default stipulation.
As per prosecution story, on 23/05/2018 complainant Kailash gave an
information to the police that his brother Narayan left the house on 22/05/2018 at
near about 08:00 PM but did not return to house. The information was recorded as
missing person No.38/2018. Thereafter, his search was started and during the
search the dead body of Narayan was found in a well situated in the agricultural
field of Mannaji. Merg was registered. The injuries were found over the dead body
and in order to conceal the evidence, the dead body was wrapped in a plastic bag
and tied up with the heavy stone and thrown into the well. Preliminary
investigation has revealed that the appellant No.2 Dinesh was in contact with
Sanjay in respect of making the money double by way of black magic. When the
amount of approximately Rs.2,50,000/- was not doubled, then Sanjay along with
2 CRA-7725-2021
other four accused persons have strangulated the neck of deceased, caused injury
and committed his murder. Before that they looted Rs.2,50,000/- from the
deceased and thereafter, distributed. On the basis of memo under Section 27 of the
Evidence Act of Sanjay, this appellant was arrested. Thereafter, the police has
collected the CDR and the call location of all these five accused persons and filed
the charge sheet before the trial Court.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is an innocent
person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. At the time of incident,
this appellant Dinesh was not in Village Sajwani. Even his call details and call
location nowhere establishes his presence on the spot. He has been falsely
implicated only on the basis of one call with Sanjay. Apart from that police has not
collected any incriminating evidence connecting the appellant Dinesh with this
crime. Merely recovery of cash amount cannot connect the appellant with the
offence. Appellant was on bail during the trial and he has not misused the liberty
given to him. Looking to old pendency of the cases for consideration, final
conclusion of this appeal would take sufficient long time. There is a strong case in
favour of the appellant. Hence, the execution of the remaining part of the jail
sentence of the appellant be suspended till the final disposal of this appeal.
On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State
opposes the prayer by supporting the impugned judgment and submitted that the
trial Court after due appreciation of evidence has rightly convicted this appellant.
Hence, he is not entitled to be released on bail and therefore, application be
dismissed.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the
allegation levelled against the appellant and also taking note of the fact that he has
3 CRA-7725-2021
been implicated in the crime only on the basis of a singular call; the call details and
call locations nowhere establishes his presence on the spot; appellant was on bail
during the trial; there is no complaint that he has misused the liberty granted to
him and final conclusion of the appeal will also take sufficient long time. Hence, I
deem it proper to suspend the remaining custodial sentence of the appellant. It is
directed that subject to deposit of the fine amount, if not already deposited, with
the trial Court and on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
learned trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court, the
execution of remaining custodial part of the sentence of the appellant No.2 Dinesh
shall remain suspended till final disposal of this appeal.
The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before the
Registry of this Court on 06/05/2025 and on all such subsequent dates, which are
fixed in this behalf.
With the aforesaid, I.A.No.694/2025 stands disposed of.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
rashmi
