Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lucky Alias Rudransh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 March, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1 CRA-6128-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 6128 of 2021
(LUCKY ALIAS RUDRANSH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 12-03-2025
Shri R.K. Shukla, learned counsel and Shri Kushagra Shukla, learned
counsel for the appellant.
Shri A.K. Nirankari, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Shri B.L. Kushwah, learned counsel for the complainant.
1. Heard on I.A. No.27016/2024, third application under Section under
Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C filed on behalf of appellant- Lucky @ Rudransh for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail. His first application (I.A.
No.14206/2022) and second application (I.A. No.16019/2023) for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated
18.11.2022 and 15.09.2023 respectively.
2. Appellant stood convicted for the offence punishable under Section 341
of IPC and sentenced to undergo one month's RI with fine of Rs.500/-, under
Section 302/34 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with fine of
Rs.10,000/- with default stipulations respectively vide judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 09.09.2021 passed by the Court of Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhind in Sessions Trial No.1500165/2016.
3. 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 initially eye witness Jayraj Singh Chauhan (PW/2) in his statement
under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., which was taken immediately after the date of
incident i.e. 02.12.2015, role of present appellant has not been referred to inflict
2 CRA-6128-2021
any gunshot injury but after 20 days supplementary statement of same witness
was taken, in which he mentioned the fact that the appellant-Lucky and other co-
accused-Anna inflicted gunshot injuries by their respective weapons. This was
improvement in the statement. In his Court statement same witness (PW/2)
mentioned the fact that the present appellant has open fired over the deceased
when he was running from the spot. However, said witness submits that no injury
was caused from the fire of appellant-Lucky. In the case no recovery of weapon
was made from the appellant and only recovery of weapon was made from co-
accused-Ashwani and ballistic report indicates that weapon was not used for
commission of offence because of scratch mark. Other eye witnesses Avinash
(PW/1) and Ram Naresh (PW10) did not support the story of prosecution and
declared hostile. After 20 days of investigation, three witnesses Anil, Satyam and
Pankaj Dubey were included as eye witnesses, in which Pankaj Dubey was not
examined before the Court and rest two witness made the case more implicative
qua appellant.
4. The appellant has already suffered around four years of incarceration as
pre and post trial detention and he did not inflict any gunshot injury to the victim.
His role is confined to presence only. Hearing of appeal shall take some time and
he has a good case on merits. Appellant undertakes to abide by all terms and
conditions as imposed by this Court. Under such circumstances, learned counsel
for appellant prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present
appellant.
5. Learned counsel for respondent/State as well as complainant 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
3 CRA-6128-2021
the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, 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 09.05.2025 and, thereafter, on
such subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Registry in this behalf.
7. Appellant shall not be source 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.27016/2024 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) (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE JUDGE
neetu
