Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajmati Vishwakarma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 June, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-11354-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 11354 of 2023
(RAJMATI VISHWAKARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 18-06-2025
Shri Eshwar Das Vaishy, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor, submits that he adopts
earlier objections.
Heard on I.A. No. 5290/2025 which is second application under
Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
appellant-Rajmati Vishwakarma.
First application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail was
dismissed as withdrawn on 20/08/2024.
This appeal is filed being aggrieved of judgment dated 08/08/2023
passed by learned Sessions Judge, Singrauli (M.P.) in Sessions Trial
No.99/2021 convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment with
fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation of.
It is submitted that there are grey areas in the prosecution story.
Ayush Vishwakarma, S/o Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma (PW-4) though
deposed that he had seen his mother cutting his father with Tanga, but in
cross-examination he admitted that he had not seen his mother. There are
contradictions in his Court statement vis-a-vis case diary statement (Ex.D/1)
in which he admitted that when he heard cries of his father, then he had
2 CRA-11354-2023
woken up and had seen his father but not his mother, thereafter he went to
sleep again. Thus, it is submitted that Ayush Vishwakarma, S/o Pawan
Kumar Vishwakarma (PW-4) is a tutored witness who was in custody of his
grand-parents and uncle etc.
It is submitted that Sushma Vishwakarma (PW-5) has admitted that
her sister-in-law was preparing alcohol at home and many persons used to
visit her for consumption of alcohol. There is also an admission on the part
of Manoj Kumar (PW-1) that Vidyasagar Soni was having enmity with the
deceased as deceased had kept his wife as his kept for some duration.
It has come in the evidence of Sushma Vishwakarma (PW-5) as well
as in the statement of I.O. of the case that there is no gate to lock the house
of the appellant and has an open access. Thus, it is submitted that once
Police had taken Vidyasagar Soni into custody, with a view to save him,
present appellant has been falsely implicated. Witnesses of seizure are
hostile, they have not supported the case of prosecution. It is, thus,
submitted that the story of prosecution is unnatural. Prosecution witnesses
are residing in the immediate neighbourhood and if any incident was having
taken place in the hands of the present appellant when cries of the deceased
would have insufficient to wake up them. Thus, prayer is made to suspend
the sentence of appellant and release him on bail.
Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand,
opposes the aforesaid prayer and submits that needle of doubt is strongly
pointing towards involvement of the present appellant, therefore, no
indulgence can be shown.
3 CRA-11354-2023
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record, it being a case of circumstantial evidence and there appears to be
good chances of success in appeal, thus, without commenting on merit, this
Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to suspend execution of remaining
part of the jail sentence of the appellant and to release him on bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.5290/2025 is allowed. It is directed that on
depositing of fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a
personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with
two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial
Court for her appearance before the Trial Court on 29.8.2025 and on all
subsequent dates as may be fixed by the concerned Trial Court, the
execution of remaining part of the jail sentence of the appellant shall remain
suspended and he be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
List this appeal for final hearing in due course.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
ts
