Madhya Pradesh High Court
Purab Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 January, 2025
1 CRA-10214-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 10214 of 2024
(PURAB SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 20-01-2025
Shri Trilok Chand Jain - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri H.S.Rathore - Govt. Advocate for the respondent / State.
Per : Binod Kumar Dwivedi J.
Heard on I.A.No.19784/2024, 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 the appellant Purab Singh S/o Abhay Singh Damor arising out of judgment
dated 16/08/2024 delivered in S.T.No.110/2022 by I Additional Sessions
Judge, District Jhabua.
The appellant stands convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal
Code, 1860; and Section 27 and 25(1)(B) of the Arms Act and sentenced to
undergo Imprisonment for Life with fine of Rs.5,000/-; and 07 years RI with
fine of Rs.2,000/- respectively with usual default stipulation.
As per prosecution case, appellant Purab Singh caused death of
deceased Pappu on 02/03/2022 at 23:30 hours by firing a bullet shot on him.
Incident was reported to concerned police station, where FIR was lodged and
charge sheet was filed against the appellant and co-accused Badiya.
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
2 CRA-10214-2024
in its right perspective. 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 anomalies. Incident as
per prosecution case has taken place in the night on 02/03/2022 at about
23:30 hours, but none has witnessed appellant Purab Singh firing shot on the
deceased. The mattress on which the deceased was allegedly sleeping at the
time of incident has not been seized by the prosecution. To bolster his
submission, learned counsel has invited attention of this Court towards para
25 and 26 of the statement of complainant Rakesh (PW-1). It is further
submitted that no reliable eye-witness account to connect the appellant from
the concerned offence is available. Complete chain of circumstantial
evidence also not prove the commission of offence by the appellant.
Armourer Dhulsingh Bhabhar (PW-11) has mentioned in his statement
before the Court that he has marked Katta (Aritcle A-1) with 02/2022, which
is not visible and he has admitted that probably the Katta has been changed.
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.
3 CRA-10214-2024
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, we find it to be a fit case to suspend the
remaining custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, I.A.No.19784/2024 is allowed. S ubject 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 his appearance before the Registry
of this Court on 03/03/2025 and on all such subsequent dates, which are
fixed in this regard.
Accordingly, the said IA is disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Tej
