Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 March, 2025
1 CRA-13437-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 13437 of 2024
(SUNIL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 26-03-2025
Shri Vivek Singh - Senior Advocate with Shri Harshit Tiwari -
Advocate for appellant.
Shri Tarun Pagare - Govt. Advocate for the respondent / State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Being arguable, the appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.1024/2025, first application under Section 430
of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389(1)
of Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on
behalf of the appellant Sunil S/o Narayan Lodhi.
The appellant stands convicted under Sections 307/34, 324 and 341 of
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 250(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959 and
sentenced to undergo 10 years RI with fine of Rs.25,000/-; 01 year RI with
fine of Rs.5,000/-; 06 months RI with fine of Rs.500/- and 01 year RI with
fine of Rs.500/- respectively with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this
impugned judgment submits that appellant is innocent and he has 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
2 CRA-13437-2024
and conjectures and has been passed ignoring serious infirmities and
anomalies. The allegation on the appellant is that he has caused injury to
Himmat Singh by stabbing on his left arm, which has been found simple in
nature. It is further submitted that during trial appellant was in jail for near
about 01 month and from the date of judgment i.e. 23/11/2024 he is suffering
jail incarceration. The appeal being of the year 2024 is not likely to be heard
finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour of the appellant.
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 appellant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that possibility of final
hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak, without expressing any
conclusive opinion on merits, I find it to be a fit case to suspend the
remaining custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, application is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount,
if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of
the appeal is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellant be released on
bail on his furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
3 CRA-13437-2024
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of learned trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-
(1) The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 30/04/2025
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 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.
The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. /
Section 491 of BNSS, 2023 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 appellant
shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under
4 CRA-13437-2024
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.
I.A.No.1025/2025, which is an application for urgent hearing, also
stands disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Tej
