Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lallulal Baiga vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 March, 2025
1 CRA-4319-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4319 of 2019
(LALLILAI BAIGA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 10-03-2025
Shri Anurag Shivhare - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Chandra Mohan Tiwari - Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No. 5650/2025 , which is an application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail to appellant arising out of judgment dated
21.12.2017 delivered in Sessions Trial No.106/2014 by First Additional
Sessions Judge, Budhar.
The appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- and R.I.
for two years with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.
The first application was dismissed for want of prosecution. The
second application was withdrawn on 04.07.2023 with liberty to renew the
application after completion of ten years of imprisonment. The third
application was thereafter withdrawn on 20.07.2024.
The case of the prosecution is that one Chhotelal Shrivastava lodged a
missing report on 16.01.2014 in respect of his son Ghanshyam Shrivastava,
who was stated to be missing from 12.01.2014. During investigation of
missing report, it is stated that the body of the deceased Ghanshyam
Shrivastava was found in Madhya Madni Haar jungle and his skull was
found in the nearby place on the information given by Vishnumani Tiwari
2 CRA-4319-2019
(PW-8).
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he was not named by
the informant Chhotelal or any other witnesses examined by the prosecution.
The body of the deceased was also found on the information given by
Vishnuman Tiwari (PW-8). There is no eye-witness in the case and the entire
case is based upon circumstantial evidence. However, chain of the
circumstances is not complete in the instant case. He submits that the
prosecution has failed to establish the motive with the appellant for
committing murder of Ghanshyam Shrivastava. He further submits that the
only allegations made is with respect to the alleged affair of deceased
Ghanshyam Shrivastava with co-accused Smt. Ramrati Baiga, which is also
not established during the trial . Referring to the evidence of Chhotelal
Shrivastava, it is pointed out that even the said witness, who is father of the
deceased, has stated that after the commission of alleged offence he came to
know about the affair.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that he has been
convicted solely on the statement of Lallua Baiga (PW-5) and Om Prakash
Sahu (PW-6). However, from their statement also the commission of offence
by the appellant is not established. He also submits that even the
identification of skull and skeleton is also not established beyond reasonable
doubt. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Thus,
remaining jail sentence of the present appellant may be suspended.
Learned Government Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail and prays for rejection of
3 CRA-4319-2019
the application.
Considering submissions of learned counsel for the appellant there is
no motive established by the prosecution for commission of murder by the
appellant and the fact that the prosecution case is based on the call details of
the mobile phone of the deceased with that of the appellant and his wife
Ramrati and the same has not been accepted by the trial Court itself. The
appellant has already undergone sentence of more than 10 years. There is
bleak chance of final hearing of this appeal in near future. Therefore,
without expressing any conclusive opinion on the merits of the case, we
deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of appellant.
Accordingly, I.A. No.5650/2025 is allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of this appellant is hereby suspended and it is
directed that appellant-Lallulal Baiga be released on bail on his furnishing
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 trial Court
with a further direction to appear before the trial Court, concerned firstly on
12.06.2025 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
RC
