[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Videshi @ Sukram Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 January, 2026
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1 CRA-4472-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4472 of 2024
(VIDESHI @ SUKRAM YADAV AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 08-01-2026
Ms. Bhumika Lekhwani, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.8492/2024, which is first application under Section
430(1) of BNSS/389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail to appellants Videshi alias Sukram Yadav, S/o Nathuram, Raja Bhaiya
alias Sri Ram Yadav, S/o Sujani Yadav and Sindhu alias Sindhupal Yadav,
S/o Botal Yadav.
The appellants are aggrieved of the judgment dated 23/12/2023 passed
by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Tikamgarh
(M.P.) in S.C. No.24/2020, whereby the appellants have been convicted and
sentenced as under :-
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment in
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
lieu of fine
397, R.I. for 07
397/34 I.P.C. Rs.5,000/- R.I. for 06 months
years
Life
302/34 I.P.C. Rs.10,000/- R.I. for 06 months
imprisonment
25(1- R.I. for 05
B)/27 Arms Act Rs.5,000/- R.I. for 06 months
years
2 CRA-4472-2024
Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, prays for withdrawal
of this application on behalf of appellant No.1-Videshi alias Sukram Yadav,
S/o Nathuram.
Accordingly, this application is dismissed as withdrawn so far it
relates to appellant No.1-Videsh alias Sukram Yadav.
Now this application is being considered on behalf of appellants No.2-
Raja Bhaiya alias alias Sri Ram Yadav and appellant No.3-Sindhu alias
Sindhupal Yadav.
It is submitted that TIP as was carried out by Halke alias Ramratan
(PW-1) is polluted inasmuch as this witness admitted that accused were
shown to him at Police Station. It is also submitted that identification is
polluted, CCTV footage does not make mention of the time and date as
admitted by Kailash Vishwakarma (PW-21). It is further submitted that
Arms Moharrir report (Ex.P/36) is inconclusive. There are good chances of
success in appeal. Hence, prayer is made to suspend the remaining jail
sentence of the appellants No.2 and 3 and to release them on bail.
Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, in
his turn, opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail and
submits that main accused is Videshi alias Sukram Yadav who has been
identified as the main assailant who had fired gun shot.
Considering the aforesaid facts so also the fact that the appeal is going
to take time for its disposal, without commenting on the merits of the case,
3 CRA-4472-2024
we are of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of the appellants No.2-Raja Bhaiya alias alias Sri
Ram Yadav and appellant No.3-Sindhu alias Sindhupal Yadav and to release
them on bail.
Accordingly, I.A. No.8492/2024 is allowed.
It is directed that on depositing the fine amount, if not already
deposited and on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for their appearance before the
trial court on 23/04/2026 and on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial
court, the execution of remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon
appellants No.2-Raja Bhaiya alias alias Sri Ram Yadav and appellant No.3-
Sindhu alias Sindhupal Yadav shall remain suspended and they shall be
released on bail till final disposal of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in Part-B of the cause list as per its turn
and seniority.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN)
JUDGE JUDGE
ts
