Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kanhaiya Banjara vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 October, 2025
1 CRR-4448-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRR No. 4448 of 2025
(KANHAIYA BANJARA AND OTHERS Vs MANMOHAN MALVIYA )
CRR No. 4441 of 2025
Dated : 06-10-2025
Shri Amit Dubey - Advocate for applicants.
Shri Sunil Rao - Panel Lawyer for State.
Heard on the question of admission.
The revisions are admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A. Nos.22260 of 2025 and 22461 of 2025 in CRR No.4448
of 2025, which are the first applications filed under Section 438 of the BNSS
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to applicant Naveen and
applicants Kanhaiya Banjara and Arjun respectively. Also heard on I.A.
Nos.22251 of 2025 and 22460 of 2025 in CRR No.4441 of 2025, which are
the first applications filed under Section 401 of the CrPC/442 of the BNSS
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to applicant Naveen and
applicants Kanhaiya Banjara and Arjun respectively.
2. The applicants have been convicted for the offence punishable under
Sections 327/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 02 years and
fine of Rs.1,000/- each with default stipulations in Criminal Appeal No.163
of 2022 and Criminal Appeal No.128 of 2025 vide judgments dated
01.09.2025 passed by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge,
Nasrullaganj, District Sehore.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants have submitted that applicants
Kanhaiya Banjara and Arjun have already served out more than 1 year and
2 CRR-4448-2025
10 months' incarceration while the total punishment is awarded up to two
years R.I. and fine. They have already deposited the fine amount. As far as
applicant Naveen is concerned, it is submitted that he has not named in the
FIR and the complainant Manmohan (PW-1) though stated the name of
applicant Naveen in his examination-in-chief but in cross-examination he
has categorically admitted that the name of Sadiq and Naveen has not been
disclosed by him in FIR (Ex.P/1) and Police Statement. He also admitted that
no test identification parade has been conducted by the Police in respect of
Sadiq and Naveen. Therefore, as far as applicant Naveen is concerned, there
is no evidence on record against him. The learned trial Court has erroneously
culled out the finding of conviction against him also. Since the present
criminal revisions are not likely to be heard finally in the near future, and the
applicants have bona fide hope of succeeding in the revisions, learned
counsel has prayed for suspension of the jail sentence during the pendency of
the revisions. They are ready to comply with all the conditions that may be
imposed by this Court. Under these circumstances, he prayed to suspend the
jail sentence of the applicants.
4. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the applications
and prayed for their rejection.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
parties and keeping in view the custody period of the applicants Kanhaiya
Banjara and Arjun and the evidence in respect of applicant Naveen, but
without commenting on merits of the case, I.A. Nos.22260 of 2025 and
3 CRR-4448-2025
22461 of 2025 in CRR No.4448 of 2025 and I.A. Nos.22251 of 2025 and
22460 of 2025 in CRR No.4441 of 2025 are hereby allowed.
7. It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited, on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the jail sentence of the
applicants Kanhaiya Banjara, Arjun and Naveen shall remain suspended and
they shall be released on bail for securing their presence before the trial
Court concerned on 24.11.2025 and on such other dates as may be fixed in
this regard by that Court during pendency of this case.
8. List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
THK
