Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mayank @ Bhanu Arya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 January, 2025
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1 CRA-13048-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 13048 of 2024
(MAYANK @ BHANU ARYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 27-01-2025
Shri Sankalp Kochar - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Akshay Namdeo - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
Per Justice Smt. Anuradha Shukla.
Heard on I.A.No.30622/2024, which is first application filed under
Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, for suspension of
jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of sole appellant - Mayank @ Bhanu
Arya.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 333 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of
Rs.2,000/-, Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment
with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively, with default stipulations vide judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.11.2024 passed by Second
Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, District Bhopal, in S.T. No.867/2018.
This first application for seeking suspension of sentence has been
argued on the grounds that the learned trial Court had relied upon the
testimony of complainant Dwarka Parmar (PW1), but his Court testimony is
not consistent with the information given by Jaswant Singh Chandel, who
had brought the injured to Narmada Trauma Center, Bhopal and had
informed that the victim sustained injuries in a road traffic accident while
crossing the road; Jaswant Singh Chandel (PW3) too has given a totally
2 CRA-13048-2024
inconsistent narrative during his Court testimony as compared to his earlier
testimony. Reliance has also been placed on documents marked as Ex.P/26
and P/27, which contain the history of alleged injury and there too it is
mentioned that patient was hit by a four wheeler while crossing the road.
The vehicle number was not disclosed in any of these documents and it was
for the first time mentioned in the FIR, which was lodged with a delay of
more than one day. It has also been argued that the police statements of
alleged eyewitnesses were also recorded with a considerable delay.
According to prosecution, the vehicle involved in the crime belonged to one
Pankaj Balchandani, who lodged the FIR of Ex.P/13(C) on 17.06.2018
claiming that his four wheeler which was given for repair works was misused
for causing accident. It is claimed that this FIR was lodged to falsely
implicate the applicant. It has also been argued that the FIR of present crime
was lodged against an unknown person and TIP was held with a delay of
almost 2 months without putting the appellant in mask during the intervening
period. Based on these facts, a request has been made to allow this
application.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application on the
ground that to avoid the checking by police at a checkpost, appellant
intentionally ran over the victim, who was a police officer and thereby
committed his murder, therefore, no case is made out for suspension of
sentence.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Having heard the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties,
3 CRA-13048-2024
we are of the considered opinion that till disposal of this appeal, execution of
jail sentences awarded to the appellant under the impugned judgment deserve
to be suspended. Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case,
this 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
the trial Court concerned on 23.04.2025 and on such other dates as may be
fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.
Accordingly, the aforesaid I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI) (ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE JUDGE
rv
