Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul @ Tulsiram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 September, 2025
1 CRA-1162-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1162 of 2022
(RAHUL @ TULSIRAM AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 24-09-2025
Shri Ashish Kumar Tiwari- Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Akhilendra Singh- Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.21200/2025, 4th application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C./Section 430(1) of BNSS, 2023, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail
filed on behalf the appellant No. 1- Rahul @ Tulsiram. His first application was
dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 20.02.2023, second application
was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.11.2023, third application was
dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 19.12.2023.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 14.12.2021 passed
by Special Judge Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, Hoshangabad, District Hoshangabad (M.P.) in S.C.A.T.R.
No.73/2013, whereby appellant No. 1 has been convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction U/s. Imprisonment Fine In lieu of default
Life Additional R.I.
302 read with Section 149 of IPC Rs.1000/-
imprisonment for 3 months
324 read with Section 149 of IPC causing Additional R.I.
R.I. for 1 year Rs.500/-
injury to Lokesh for 45 days
324 read with Section 149 of IPC causing Additional R.I.
R.I. for 1 year Rs.500/-
injury to Vishal for 45 days
323 read with Section 149 of IPC causing R.I. for 3 Additional R.I.
Rs.200/-
injury to Bhupendra months for 30 days
Additional R.I.
148 of IPC R.I. for 1 year Rs.500/-
for 45 days
Additional R.I.
25(1-B)(b) of Arms Act R.I. for 1 year Rs.500/- for 45 days
R.I. for 3 Additional R.I.
25(1) of Arms Act Rs.500/-
years for 45 days
2 CRA-1162-2022
3. Learned counsel for appellant No. 1 submits that appellant No.1 is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that there are
twelve accused persons in the present case. It is also submitted that no specific role
has been attributed to appellant No. 1. There is no direct evidence with regard to
involvement of appellant No. 1 in the commission of offence. The prosecution has
failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt therefore, benefit of doubt ought
to have been given to appellant No. 1. There are material contradictions and
omissions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. The appellant No. 1 has
already undergone more than 4 years of incarceration. It is further submitted that
the co-accused person namely Umesh Sihote @ Tipu has already been granted bail
by this Court vide order dated 08.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.
1718/2022. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution case, the allegation
against appellant No. 1 is similar to that of co-accused person and, therefore,
appellant No. 1 seeks parity with the co-accused -Umesh Sihote @ Tipu. This
appeal is of the year 2022 and there is no possibility of early hearing of the appeal
in near future. The appellant No.1 is 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
on the ground of parity.
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, the
period of incarceration already undergone by appellant No. 1 as well as the fact
that the sentence of the co-accused -Umesh Sihote @ Tipu has already been
3 CRA-1162-2022
suspended by this Court vide order dated 08.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal
No. 1718/2022, we are of the opinion that the application for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail to appellant No. 1 can be considered.
7. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I.A.
No.21200/2025 is allowed.
8 . It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited, the remaining jail sentence of appellant No. 1-Rahul @ Tulsiram is
hereby suspended and he be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further direction to appear
before the Registry of this Court on 16.01.2026 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
AL
