Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mahadev Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 September, 2025
1 CRA-3942-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 3942 of 2022
(MAHADEV YADAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 02-09-2025
Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra - Advocate for appellants No.5, 6, 9 and
10.
Shri Ashish Kumar Kurmi - Advocate for appellant No.2 and 12.
Shri Akhilendra Singh - Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Shri Pradeep Patel - Advocate for the objector.
Heard on I.A. No.19004/2025 , repeat application under Section 389(1)
of Cr.P.C./Section 430(1) of BNSS, for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail filed on behalf of appellant No.5- Kailas Yadav, appellant No.9- Raju @
Rajendra Yadav and appellant No.10- Mangal Singh Yadav . Earlier
application of appellants No.5 and 10 is dismissed on merits vide order dated
01.08.2022 and earlier application of appellant No.9 was dismissed as
withdrawn vide order 21.06.2022.
Also heard on I.A. No.15180/2025, fifth repeat application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C./Section 430(1) of BNSS, for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant No.12-Ashok Yadav .
His earlier application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 13.01.2023.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 13.04.2022
passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Nowgaon, District Chhatarpur
(M.P.) in S.T. No.100205/2010, whereby each of the aforesaid
2 CRA-3942-2022
appellants/applicants have been convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction U/s. Imprisonment Fine In lieu of default
148 of IPC R.I. for 01 year Rs.1000/- Additional R.I. for 3 months
302/149 of IPC Life imprisonment Rs.2000/- Additional R.I. for 1 year
323/149 of IPC (3 R.I. for 6-6 months for Rs.1000/- (each Additional R.I. for 3 months
counts) each count count) (each count)
427 of IPC R.I. for 3 months Rs.500/- Additional R.I. for 3 months
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the trial Court has
wrongly convicted and sentenced the present appellants. It is further
submitted that the present appellants had no motive to commit murder of the
deceased. The prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable
doubt therefore, benefit of doubt ought to have been given to the present
appellants. There are material contradictions and omissions in the
testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that the jail
sentence of other co-accused persons have already been suspended and they
have been released on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 26.06.2025. The present appellants have already undergone almost
three years of incarceration. This appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no
possibility of early hearing of the appeal in near future. They are ready to
furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and conditions,
which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the application
for suspension of sentence may be allowed.
4 . Learned counsel for the State on the other hand has opposed the
application for suspension of sentence and supported the impugned judgment
of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6 . Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties
3 CRA-3942-2022
and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that
both the applications for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
appellants No.5, 9, 10 and 12 can be considered.
7. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case,
I.A. No.19004/2025 and I.A. No.15180/2025 are allowed.
8 . It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited, the remaining jail sentence of appellant No.5- Kailash Yadav,
appellant No.9 Raju @ Rajendra Yadav, appellant No.10- Mangal Singh
Yadav and appellant No.12- Ashok Yadav is hereby suspended and they be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to
appear before the Registry of this Court on 15.12.2025 and on such other
dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard during pendency of this
appeal.
9. List the matter for final hearing in due course.
(VIVEK KUMAR SINGH) (AJAY KUMAR NIRANKARI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Shanu
