Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pawan Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 March, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1 CRA-1218-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1218 of 2017
(PAWAN SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 01-03-2025
Shri Ashok Jain with Ms. Nikita Jain- Advocates for appellant.
Shri Vijay Sundaram- Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
1. Heard on I.A. No. 24625/2024, fourth repeat application under
Section under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C filed on behalf of appellant No.1 -
Pawan Sharma for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. His earlier
application was dismissed simplicitor on 24.08.2024.
2. Appellant stood convicted for the offence punishable under Section
302/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of
Rs.1,000/-, under Section 147 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo two
years' RI with fine of Rs.500/- and under Section 201 of IPC and sentenced
to undergo seven years' RI with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations
respectively v i d e judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
07.09.2017 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Morena (M.P.) in
Special Sessions Trial No.13/2014.
3. Laxmi, a five- year old daughter of deceased Manisha, remained
consistent in her statements under Sections 161 and 164 of CrPC and in her
Court deposition that all accused persons had tightened the cloth around the
neck of deceased Manisha and thereafter, she was hanged. Co-accused
Vandana Sharma was alleged to have locked Laxmi in the neighbouring
2 CRA-1218-2017
room. During investigation, separate map (Ex.P-4) and seizure memo (Ex.P-
2 and P-3) were prepared. Marriage card of deceased (Ex.P-5) and her Janam
Kundli (Ex.P-6) were seized and seizure memo (Ex.P-7) was prepared. The
articles seized from the spot were sent for medical examination to State
Forensic Laboratory, Sagar by S.P. Morena. After recording of statements of
witnesses, accused were arrested.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for appellant that the trial
Court erred in convicting the present appellant and awarding jail sentence. It
is further submitted that appellant has suffered eight years and one month of
incarceration as pre and post trial detention. It is further submitted that co-
accused Sonu @ Ashish, Bhuri Bai, Ramnaresh Sharma, Sheel Sharma and
Vandana Sharma have been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 12.07.2024,
25.03.2022, 14.02.2023, 19.12.2022 and 08.02.2022 and therefore, present
appellant seeks parity. He undertakes to abide by all terms and conditions as
imposed by this Court. Appellant has good case on merits and final hearing
of appeal would take some time. Under such circumstances, learned counsel
for appellant prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present
appellant on the ground of parity.
5. Learned counsel for respondent/State opposed the prayer and
prayed for dismissal of the application looking to the nature and gravity of
offence.
6. Considering the submissions and the arguments advanced by
counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case,
3 CRA-1218-2017
especially factum of parity, this Court is inclined to grant suspension of
sentence to appellant. Hence, without commenting on the merits of the case,
application is allowed subject to deposit of fine amount and it is ordered that
on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the concerned trial Court, jail sentence of appellant shall remain
suspended till disposal of this appeal and he be released on bail. Appellant is
further directed to remain present before the Registry of this Court on
28/04/2025 and, thereafter, on such subsequent dates as may be fixed by the
Registry in this behalf.
7. Appellant shall not be source of of embarrassment to the
complainant party in any manner and he shall not move in their vicinity,
otherwise benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail shall be
immediately recalled.
8. I.A. No.24625/2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK) (HIRDESH)
JUDGE JUDGE
*AVI*
