Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balistar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 May, 2025
1 CRA-1671-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 1671 of 2025
(BALISTAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 26-05-2025
Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Raj Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant No.6.
Shri Samar Ghuraiya - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.7682/2025 and I.A.No.7019/2025, applications under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant
of bail on behalf of the appellant No.2-Narottam Singh, appellant No.3-
Suresh @ Fauji and appellant No.4-Rameshwar respectively.
The appellant No.2-Narottam Singh, appellant No.3 - Suresh @ Fauji
and appellant No.4-Rameshwar stand convicted under Sections 148 of IPC
and sentenced to undergo 5 years RI with fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Sections
307/149 of IPC (on 3 counts) and sentenced to undergo 7-7 years RI with
fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Sections 336 of IPC with fine of Rs.250/- with
usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants submit that only allegation against
the appellant Narottam is that he has assaulted the buffalo of Girraj which
has entered into the premises of Narottam Gurjar. He further submitted that
he has not assaulted anyone nor he has taken part in the incident. He has
been falsely implicated in this matter. Counsel appearing on behalf of
appellant No.3 and 4 submits that they have been falsely implicated in the
matter. Main allegation is against Komal who fired gunshot causing injury to
2 CRA-1671-2025
Bhoora, Dharmendra and Bhola. The allegations against the appellants -
Suresh and Rameshwar are that after the main incident of fire, they entered
into the house of complainant - Girraj Singh and pelted stones. No injury has
been caused to anyone of this alleged pelting of stones. Learned counsel has
invited the attention of this Court towards para-75 of the judgment whereby
all the accused persons have been admitted of the offence under Sections 294
and 452 of IPC. 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.
The appellants were granted anticipatory bail therefore, they are in custody
from the date of judgment i.e. 29.01.2025 till today. It is further submitted
that the appeal being of the year 2025 is not likely to be heard finally in near
future. Furthermore, counsel for the appellants submit that co-accused
Kaliyan Singh has already been granted suspension of sentence. 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 opposed the prayer but fairly admitted that no apparent role
is visible on the face of record but they are the part of incident wherein three
persons have been shot.
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 and period of incarceration,
3 CRA-1671-2025
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, applications are 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
No.2-Narottam Singh, appellant No.3-Suresh @ Fauji and appellant No.4-
Rameshwar be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety each
in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for compliance
with following conditions:-
(1) The appellants shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellants shall appear before the Trial Court on 26/06/2025
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,
4 CRA-1671-2025
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 appellants
shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under
intimation to the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, I.A.No.7682/2025 and I.A.No.7019/2025 stand allowed
and disposed off.
List for final hearing in due course.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
V. JUDGE
Ashish*
