Madhya Pradesh High Court
Satyanarayan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 January, 2025
1 CRA-12550-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 12550 of 2022
(SATYANARAYAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 23-01-2025
Shri Nilesh Dave, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Vinita Dwivedi, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.18688/2024, second 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- Satyanarayan S/o Vinod Sharma. His first application was
dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 02.07.2024.
The appellant stands convicted under Sections 420/34, 467/34, 468/34
and 471 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 4 years R.I. with fine of Rs.1000/-,
10 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000/-, 4 years R.I. with fine of Rs.1000/- and
1 year R.I. with fine of Rs.1000/- with usual default stipulation.
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. No cogent evidence is available to connect
the appellant with the commission of offence either under Section 420 IPC
or 467 of IPC. He has made entry in his book on the basis of voter ID which
was placed before him in the name of Hiralal. He is suffering incarceration
since 06.12.2022. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its right
perspective. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statement
2 CRA-12550-2022
of the witnesses. Impugned judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures.
It is further submitted that the appeal being of the year 2022 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. He further submits that the appellant was hand
in gloves with Govind who is the main accused, therefore, he is not entitled
for grant of suspension of jail sentence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, looking to the fact that
Hiralal himself has turned hostile, factum of jail custody, 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 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
3 CRA-12550-2022
conditions:-
(1) The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 10/03/2025
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 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.
4 CRA-12550-2022
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
I.A.Nos.9377/2024 and 18687/2024 for urgent hearing also stands
disposed off.
List for final hearing in due course.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
RJ
