Mukesh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 165 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mukesh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2025

                                                             1                               CRA-2718-2025
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                     CRA No. 2718 of 2025
                                                 (MUKESH Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )



                           Dated : 01-05-2025
                                 Shri Kuldeep Dashora, Advocate for the appellant.
                                 Shri   Surendra    Kumar        Gupta,   Public    Prosecutor   for   the
                           respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

Record of the Trial Court has already been received.

The present appeal appears to be arguable, hence admitted for final hearing.

Heard on I.A. No. 4346/2025, first application under Section 389 (1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 = 430 (1) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on

behalf of appellant - Mukesh S/o Rameshchandra Dhakad.

Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.02.2025

passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Act, Manasa, District Neemuch in Special Case (NDPS) No.11/2017, the appellant stands convicted under Section 8/18(C) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 2 years 6 months with fine of Rs.20,000/- with usual default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant, while taking exception to this impugned judgment, submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely

2 CRA-2718-2025 implicated in this matter. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective. A short sentence of 2 year 6 months has been imposed on the appellant, out of which he has suffered more than two months. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. It is further submitted that 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 appellant. Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.

Per contra, learned counsel 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, custody period of appellant, short term sentence 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 the appellant be released

3 CRA-2718-2025

on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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 17.06.2025 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 is deemed to 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 is deemed to 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

4 CRA-2718-2025

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 gp