Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dheeraj Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 March, 2025
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1 CRA-7341-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 7341 of 2018
(DHEERAJ YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 12-03-2025
Shri Vikesh Pratap Singh - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Yogesh Dhande - Government Advocate for State.
Heard on I.A.No.16650/2024, which is sixth application filed under
Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, for suspension of
jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of sole appellant-Dheeraj Yadav . His
earlier I.A.No.16830/2018 was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated
06.02.2019, I.A.No.21774/2019 was dismissed for want of prosecution vide
order dated 02.12.2019, I.A.Nos.7884/2020, 6836/2022 and 19457/2023
were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 24.09.2020, 30.09.2022 and
03.01.2024.
The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine
of Rs.1,000/- and Section 392 read with Section 397 (two counts) of IPC and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 07 years with fine of Rs.500/- respectively,
with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 07.09.2018 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur
District Jabalpur (M.P.) in S.T. No.603/2016.
This sixth application for seeking suspension of sentence has been
argued on the facts of the case and the grounds raised are that the FIR in this
case was against unnamed persons and there was considerable delay in
2 CRA-7341-2018
holding the TIP or identification of alleged robbers as well as the robbed
items. It has also been argued that sole eye-witness namely, Sarla Netam
(PW-2) who allegedly identified the appellant during TIP was shown the face
of appellant before holding the TIP. Her statements reveal that she had an
occasion to see the appellant in police station and this fact facilitated her to
identify the appellant in TIP. It has also been argued that the proceeding of
identification of seized mobile phones was allegedly conducted by Naib
Tehsildar in Tehsil Office but victim Sarla Netam (PW-2) has claimed that
this proceeding was held in police station and that too in the presence of
police officers. It has also been argued that Ramkumar (PW-4) who claims to
have informed the 100 Dial has stated that victim Sarla Netam had informed
him about an accident and not of any incident of robbery. It has also been
submitted that no weapon was seized from appellant-Dheeraj. Based on these
facts a request has been made to allow the application for suspension of
sentence.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application claiming
that it was a case of robbery with murder where appellant committed the
offence without receiving any provocation and four external wounds were
found on the body of the deceased while his spleen had burst. It is, therefore,
submitted that the application deserves to be dismissed.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Having considered the submissions made by counsel for both the
sides, evidence available on record regarding rival submissions and the
possibilities argued here against the backdrop of established facts, we are of
3 CRA-7341-2018
considered opinion that appellant deserves to be released on bail. Therefore,
without commenting on the merit of the case, this application is allowed.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of the appellant-Dheeraj
Yadav shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing
his presence before the trial Court concerned on 27.06.2025 and on such
other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.
Accordingly, the aforesaid I.A. stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI) (ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE JUDGE
NP
