Madhya Pradesh High Court

Tarun vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 June, 2025

                                                                1                            CRA-4787-2025
                                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                         AT INDORE
                                                        CRA No. 4787 of 2025
                                                   (TARUN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )



                           Dated : 02-06-2025
                                 Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                 Shri Sudarshan Pandit, learned Govt. Advocate for the
                           respondent/State.

1. Heard on IA No.8075/2025, which is an application for urgent hearing during summer vacation.

2. Considering the reasons assigned in the application IA No.8075/2025 is allowed. The matter is taken up for hearing.

3. Heard on the question of admission.

4. After perusal of the impugned judgment the appeal is admitted for final hearing.

5. Record of the trial Court be requisitioned.

6. Also heard on I.A. No.8074/2025, which is an application filed under Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C) for suspension of sentence on behalf of appellant.

7. The appellant has been convicted under Section 397 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo 7 years R.I with fine of Rs.500/- & default stipulation.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been convicted under Section 397 of IPC and as per prosecution story Rs.50,000/- cash and motorbike have been recovered from possession of the

2 CRA-4787-2025 appellant. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused have already been granted the benefit of suspension of jail sentence by the coordinate Bench and the case of the present appellant is similar to the case of Pankaj Jat, Vishal Dhakad, Kartik and Mohit Rathore. Under these circumstances, learned counsel prays that the application for suspension of jail sentence of the appellant be allowed.

9. Learned counsel for the respondent/State fairly accedes that the case of the present appellant is similar to the case of co-accused Pankaj Jat, Vishal Dhakad, Kartik and Mohit Rathore.

10. Considering the fact that the similarly situated co-accused Pankaj Jat, Vishal Dhakad, Kartik and Mohit Rathore have already been granted suspension of jail sentence and there are bleak chances of disposal of the

appeal in near future, I deem it proper to allow the application and suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant subject to deposit of fine amount and furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court, for his appearance before the trial Court firstly on 01.08.2025 and on all further dates during the pendency of this appeal.

11. List this case for final hearing in due course along with Cr.A. No.3546/2025.

(VINAY SARAF) V. JUDGE