Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vishram Saket vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 March, 2025
1 CRA-10913-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 10913 of 2019
(VISHRAM SAKET AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 10-03-2025
Shri Arvind Kumar Singh Advocate for the appellant No.2.
Shri Manoj Kushwaha Advocate for the appellant No.3.
Shri Chandra Mohan Tiwari - Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. Nos. 33099 of 2024 which is second application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to appellant No.2 Ishwardeen Saket
and I.A. No.31438/2024, which is fourth application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail appellant No.3 Mathura Saket arising out of
judgment dated 30/11/2019 delivered in ST No.157/2018 by Second
Additional Sessions Judge, Maihar, District Satna M.P.
The appellants have been convicted under Sections 342, 323 (2
counts), 302 & 506-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo One year R.I. with
fine of Rs. 1,000/-,One year R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, life imprisonment
with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and One year R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000/-
respectively with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that earlier applications for
suspension of sentence were withdrawn without considering the merits
thereof. He Further submits that appellants have spent 7 years of actual
custody in jail. It is the case of the appellant that the deceased of the case was
one Vanshroop and he was found dead on the house of appellant. It is
2 CRA-10913-2019
contended that the case of appellant is more or less at par with the case of co-
accused Vishram Saket who has been granted the benefit of bail on
17.02.2021 on the ground that the name of that appellant was not there in the
FIR and also when the police first reached to the spot, the co-accused
Vishram was not found at the spot. However, it is contended that looking to
the prosecution version as available in para 3.2 of the judgment under
challenge, it has been the case of the prosecution that it was the co-accused
Vishram who came running and told that the deceased Vanshroop had not yet
died and thereafter, he along with the present appellants further assaulted the
deceased Vanshoop, resulting to his death. Thus, there is no real difference
between the case of co-accused and the present appellants.
Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the prosecution
version as is available on record indicates that it was the deceased Vanshroop
who had come to the house of the present appellants for the purpose of
quarrel with the present appellants. It is further submitted that it is a case of
cross-case wherein the complainant party was the actual assailant party and
two persons of said party have been convicted under Section 294, 323 of IPC
including two sons of the deceased. It is further argued that in the cross-case
judgment dated 02.12.2023, it has come on record that the sons of the
deceased were photographing the unmarried girls and other ladies of the
family of the present appellants and this was the precipitative factor which
led to the sudden quarrel and resulted in injuries to both the parties.
It is further contended that the incident took place in the house of the
appellants, which indicated that it was the deceased who was the assailant in
3 CRA-10913-2019
the matter and had come to defend his son towards photographing the ladies
of the house of present appellants.
Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed
the application on the basis of written objections.
Considering the aforesaid, but without any conclusive opinion on the
merits of the case, the applications for suspension of sentences are allowed.
Accordingly, I.A. Nos. 33099 of 2024 and I.A. No. 31438/2024, are
allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of these appellants No.2 & 3 is hereby suspended and
it is directed that appellant No.2 Ishwardeen Saket and appellant No.3
Mathura Saket be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent
surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a
further direction to appear before the trial Court, concerned firstly on -
13.05.2025 and also on such further dates as may be fixed by the concerned
trial Court in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK JAIN) (ASHISH SHROTI)
JUDGE JUDGE
DevS
