Madhya Pradesh High Court
Golu @ Ashish vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 January, 2025
1 CRA-6775-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 6775 of 2024
(GOLU @ ASHISH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 08-01-2025
Appellant by Mr. Ashish Joshi - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Ms. Vinita Dwivedi -
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.
Heard on IA No.9093 of 2024 , first application under Section 389 (1)
of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 moved on behalf of appellant Golu @
Ashish Solanki S/o Rajesh Solanki seeking suspension of remaining sentence
of imprisonment and grant of bail.
The appellant stood convicted under Sections 307/34, 324/34, 323/34,
294 and 506-II of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo five
years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, one year RI with fine of
Rs.2,000/-, six months RI with fine of Rs.500/-, fifteen days rigorous
imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- and one year RI with fine of Rs.500/-
respectively with default stipulations, and also convicted under Section 25
(1-B) B of Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced to undergo RI for one year with
fine of Rs.1,000/-, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
22.04.2024 passed by learned 29th Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in
Sessions Trial No.530 of 2020.
2 CRA-6775-2024
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this
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. There are material contradictions and omissions in
the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgment suffers from surmises
and conjectures. It is further submitted that the appellant has suffered
incarceration of about two years. It is further submitted that the appeal being
of the year 2024 is not likely to be heard finally in near future. There are fair
chances of success in this appeal. Hence, looking to the shaky evidence, a
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. It is also submitted that due to the injuries
suffered by complainant Monu and Rahul, they were admitted for sufficient
time in the hospital, which itself reveals the nature of injuries. Learned
counsel prays for dismissal of the application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case 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
3 CRA-6775-2024
remaining custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is, accordingly directed that
execution of remaining sentence of imprisonment of the appellant shall
remain suspended during pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged
on bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of 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
12.02.2025 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 nonappearance 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.
4 CRA-6775-2024
The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of CrPC /
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 stand allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
