Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ratan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 May, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1 CRA-1477-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1477 of 2024
(RATAN SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 05-05-2025
Shri Abhishek Rathore - learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Bhuwan Gautam - learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Per : Justice Gajendra Singh
1. Heard on I.A. No.4302/2025 which is second (repeat) application under
Section 430(1) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 for suspension of execution of jail sentence
and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant - Ratan Singh. His first application
was for temporary suspension and was rejected on 25.11.2024.
2. Learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant under Sections 302 r/w
120 B and 449 r/w 120 B of the IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment
with fine of Rs.3,000/- and 10 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000/- with default
stipulation in S.T. No.385/2020 by the VII Additional Session Judge, Ujjain,
District Ujjain vide judgment dated 28.12.2023.
3. Prosecution case in brief is that one Tikam Singh was residing in village
Aakasoda, Police Station Chintaman Ganesh, District Ujjain. On 08.08.2020 at
about 08:30 AM, a Dehati Nalishi (Exhibit-P/24) was lodged by one Vijay R/o
Aakasoda that at 04:00 AM, Tikam Singh has been killed in his house and his
dead body is lying on the bed and there are mark of injury in the body.
Thereafter, at 08:40 AM another intimation was given by the brother of the
deceased namely Abhijeet Singh as Exhibit-P/1 that the unknown persons have
killed his brother and wife of the deceased has intimated that the unknown
2 CRA-1477-2024
persons have taken Rs.35,000/- cash, jewelries of gold and silver and one
motorcycle. Abhijeet Singh raised suspicion against the wife of deceased Rachna
and appellant Ratan through Exhibit-P/1. On that, Crime No.20/2020 was
registered at Police Station Chintaman Ganesh, Ujjain. The final report was
submitted against Rachna Bai (wife of deceased), Veerendra Singh (brother-in-
law of deceased), Ishwar Singh and Ratan Singh (present appellant). All the
accused persons were convicted under Section 449 r/w 120 B of the IPC and 302
r/w 120 B of the IPC.
4. This second application has been preferred on the ground that the case is
based on circumstantial evidence. The autopsy report (Ex-P/4) does not mention
the injury by the knife and PW-13 stated that there was no injury on the body of
the deceased which would have been caused by the knife. There were scratch
marks on the body of the deceased as if he would have been dragged but no
explanation of the same have been offered by the prosecution because as per the
prosecution story, he was murdered on the bed and doctor has mentioned that
looking to the nature of injuries, such marks could be caused due to falling from
the bike. Co-accused Ishwar Singh has been granted suspension from the Apex
Court in SLP (Criminal) No.13511/2024 on 28.02.2025 from whom the lathi &
looted motorcycle was recovered and the case of the appellant is on better footing
than him. The complainant at whose instance the dehati nalishi was registered has
not seen the incident. Appellant is the permanent resident of District Ujjain and
there is no possibility of his absconding. Hence, it is prayed that the execution of
jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer by filing
the reply through document no.4390/2025 submitting that the jewellery recovered
on the information of the appellant have been proved to be taken from the house
3 CRA-1477-2024
of the deceased.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. The appellant has been convicted on the circumstantial evidence. The
blood stained knife, jewellery & Rs.34,000/- have been recovered from the
appellant and pant of deceased has also been recovered from the house of the
deceased on the information of the appellant. Keshar Bai (PW-6), who is the
mother of deceased has stated in para 13 that the jewellery which has been
recovered from the present appellant belongs to her and that jewellery was with
her. The doctor Vikram Raghuwanshi (PW-13) has stated in para 8 of his
statement that there is no injury with sharp edged weapon (knife) on the body of
the deceased. The investigation officer had found proved two chance print on the
Almirah that was in the house of the deceased and report of Director Fingerprint
Bureau, PHQ, Bhopal that was not exhibited by the prosecution but it is available
with the record has opined that chance print does not match with the palm print of
appellant taken for comparison.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the fact
that the appellant is having parity with the case of co-accused Ishwar Singh and
without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the application for suspension of custodial sentence filed on behalf of
the appellant deserves to be allowed.
8. Accordingly, I.A. No.4302/2025 is allowed and the execution of
remaining jail sentence of the appellant is hereby suspended till final disposal of
this appeal. It is directed that appellant - Ratan Singh be released on bail subject
to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and upon furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one
solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with a
4 CRA-1477-2024
further direction to appear before the Registry of this Court on 04.08.2025 and on
such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry of this Court in this regard
during the pendency of this appeal.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
VS
