Madhya Pradesh High Court

Raj Urf Dhanraj vs The State Of Madhya Prades on 1 May, 2025

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                            1                                CRA-10687-2024
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                CRA No. 10687 of 2024
                                          (RAJ URF DHANRAJ Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADES )



                           Dated : 01-05-2025
                                 Shri J.P. Singraul, Advocate for the appellant.
                                 Shri S.K. Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate for the respondent - State.

Heard on I.A.No.645/2025, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant-Raj @ Dhanraj.

Appellant-Raj @ Dhanraj S/o Shri Ratan Singh, is aggrieved of the judgment dated 27.08.2024, passed by the learned First Additional Session Judge Pipariya, District Narmadapuram (M.P.), in Special Trial No.43/2022, whereby, appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 148 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.200/-, under Section 302/149 of IPC, he is sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- and Section 341 of IPC, he is sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 days with fine of Rs.100/-, with default stipulation, respectively.

It is submitted that appellant is innocent. Informant Sanjay Rai, who recorded 'Dehati Nalishi' Ex.P/1, had taken names of only two persons, namely, Sanjay Sharma and Ajay @ Ajju Purvaiya as assailants. He had not taken name of any other person. SHO Ajay Tiwari (PW/51), admitted in cross-examination that in the so-called CCTV footage which was given by Yogesh Agrawal (PW/6), not

2 CRA-10687-2024

showing the faces of the other persons and on the basis of body language he identified them. Even medical evidence of Dr. Shubham Sarkar (PW/13) and Dr. Rahul Uikey (PW/14), reveals that there were only four injuries on the body of the deceased. It is submitted that appellant is in custody from 16.05.2022 to 11.05.2023, and then he is in custody from 27.08.2024, till this date. Hence, prayer is made to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant and release him on bail.

Shri Shiv Kumar Shrivastava, learned Govt. Advocate, opposes the application. He is not in a position to explain that when all the assailants were known to the informant Sanjay Rai, then why he had

taken name of only two persons Sanjay Sharma and Ajay @ Ajju Purvaiya and not of others.

Taking these facts into consideration, fact of incarceration and other circumstances, it is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on 07.07.2025 and such other dates as may be fixed by the Trial Court, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon appellant-Raj @ Dhanraj shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.

I.A.No.645/2025 is allowed & disposed of.

3 CRA-10687-2024

Certified copy as per rules.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA) JUDGE JUDGE A.Praj.