Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shubham vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 March, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRA-1686-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1686 of 2025
(SHUBHAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 20-03-2025
Shri Gaurav Singh Chouhan, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Vinod Thakur, Govt. Advocate for the responent/State.
Shri Naresh Piplodiya, Advocate for the objector.
Heard on admission.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
The appeal being arguable, admitted for hearing.
I.A. No.2974/2025 is an application for objection filed on behalf of the objector.
Considered.
I.A. No.2974/2025 stands allowed.
Also heard on I.A. No.2116/2025, first application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C./430 of BNSS, 2023 moved on behalf of appellant - Shubham seeking
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 420 of IPC and sentenced to 03 years
Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation vide judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.01.2025, passed by Additional Sessions
Judge, Nagda, District Ujjain (MP.) in S.T. No.20/2020.
Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely
implicated in this matter. The appellant was running an NGO "Nari Shakti Mahila
Kalyan Samiti" in the field of skill development and received an amount of
Rs.4,50,000/- towards training fees from the students of complainant on the promise
that at the end of training sessions, the complainant will be returned the money.
However, on completion of training session, as the money was not returned, the
complainant has lodged FIR against the appellant and co-accused Gunjan Agrawal.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PREETHA HARI
NAIR
Signing time: 3/20/2025
7:08:31 PM
2 CRA-1686-2025
Learned counsel further contends that the entire money was deposited in the account of
Gunjan Agrawal. The learned trial Court did not appreciate this fact which is apparent
from the record. There was no intention to cheat at the inception. However, co-accused
Gunjan Agrawal misappropriated entire money, therefore, the appellant failed to remit
the money to the complainant. The appellant is not the beneficiary in the transaction,
rather he himself had been a victim of fraud and misappropriation by co-accused
Gunjan Agrawal. The appellant has lodged FIR against Gunjan Agrawal as reflected
by his evidence as defence witness. The learned Trial Court has committed an error in
convicting and sentencing present appellant without appreciating the prosecution
evidence properly. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. On these
grounds, learned Counsel prays that execution of remaining sentence of imprisonment
of the appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent State opposes the application and
prays for its rejection.
The contentions of appellant have prima facie substance which deserve
consideration on merit. During trial, the present appellant remained in custody for 03
months and 10 days and, thereafter, he was extended benefit of bail. He did not misuse
the liberty. His sentence of imprisonment was suspended by the trial Court till
20.02.2025. Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties, but without commenting
upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of the view that
application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly directed that execution of
remaining jail sentence of appellant-Shubham Malviya shall remain suspended during
pendency of this appeal and he shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing personal
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety
in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court for compliance with following
conditions:-
(1). The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited) forthwith;
3 CRA-1686-2025
(2). The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 06.05.2025 , and on
such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3). The appellant shall ensure hearing of the appeal on the date fixed for such
hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on his behalf, on the date
notified for hearing.
In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order granting
suspension of sentence shall become ineffective.
The Trial Court shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance to the
appellant on any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule
2 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
Where the appellant does not appear on the date of their appearance before the
Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the Trial Court shall
be authorized to issue non-bailable/bailable warrants to secure his attendance under
intimation to the Registry of High Court. The Trial Court shall also proceed under
Section 446 of CrPC against such appellant and his surety without any reference to this
Court and without any impediment of the order granting bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42
Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
On arrest/surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellants shall be
forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to the
Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, IA stands allowed and disposed of.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
pn
