Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kushalsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 March, 2025
1 CRA-2788-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 2788 of 2025
(KUSHALSINGH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 21-03-2025
Shri Ritu Raj Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Rahul Solanki, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Record of the trial Court be requisitioned.
Heard on IA No.3758 of 2025 , first application under Section 430 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389 of
Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf
of appellant No.1 Kushalsingh, appellant No.2 Shankarsingh, appellant No.3
Ramsingh, appellant No.4 Kripalsingh and appellant No.5 Vikramsingh.
Appellants No.1 to 4 stand convicted under Sections 326/149 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 2 years with
fine of Rs.1000/- respectively with usual default stipulation. Appellant No.5
stands convicted under Sections 326/149 of IPC and 25 of Arms Act and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 2 years with fine
of Rs.500/- and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 2
years with fine of Rs.500/- with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants while taking exception to this
2 CRA-2788-2025
impugned judgment submits that appellants are innocent and they have been
falsely implicated in this matter. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence
in its right perspective. There are material contradictions and omissions in
the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgment suffers from surmises
and conjectures and has been passed ignoring serious infirmities and
anomalies. This is a case of short sentence of 2 years imprisonment. The jail
sentence of the appellants has already suspended by the trial Court up to
25.04.2025. The appeal being of the year 2025 is not likely to be heard
finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour of the appellants.
Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for suspension of jail
sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellants.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Looking to the aforesaid factual backdrop, coupled with the fact that
possibility of final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak and also
looking to the short sentence, without expressing any conclusive opinion on
merits, I find it to be a fit case to suspend the remaining custodial sentence of
the appellants.
Accordingly, application is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount,
3 CRA-2788-2025
if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of
the appeal is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellants be released
on bail on their furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) each with separate solvent surety in the like amount to
the satisfaction of learned trial Court for compliance with following -
(1) The appellants shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellants 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 appellants 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 appellants do not appear on the date of his 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.
4 CRA-2788-2025
The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. /
Section 491 of BNSS, 2023 against such appellants 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 appellant
shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under
intimation to the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
soumya
