Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jitendra Singh Tomar @ Tinku vs State Of M.P. on 4 June, 2020
Author: Sheel Nagu
Bench: Sheel Nagu
1
CRA-374-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-374-2013
(Jitendra Singh Tomar @ Tinku Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, dt. 04.06.2020
Shri A.R. Shivhare with Shri Sanjay Gupta, learned counsel for
the appellant.
Shri A.S. Ghuraiya, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard through video conferencing.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 10.04.2013 passed in S.T.No.141/10 by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior District Gwalior whereby the appellant No.1-Jitendra Singh Tomar @ Tinku has been convicted as under:
Section Imprisonment Fine
302/34 of IPC L.I. Rs. 20,000/- with
default
stipulation
307/34 of IPC 7 Years R.I. Rs.5,000/- with
default
stipulation
I.A.No. 4173/2020, 4th repeat application u/S. 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence moved on behalf of appellant No.1- Jitendra Singh Tomar @ Tinku after dismissal of earlier one as withdrawn with liberty to revisit this Court in case final hearing does not take place is taken up and considered.
2
CRA-374-2013 Appellant has suffered incarceration of more than fifteen and a half years as against life sentence imposed.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that all attempts of getting this matter finally heard have not bore any fruits. The decision of Apex Court in Shyamlal Vs. State of Rajasthan 2017 (8) SCC 517 is relied upon to press this repeat IA for suspension of sentence.
Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that appellant has large number of offences registered against him including several matters pertaining to murder and therefore, his release would be at the risk of unleashing a state of vengeance thereby rendering the life of opposite side in jeopardy.
Considering the arguments of counsel for the rival parties, this Court is of the considered view that since there is no hope of this appeal coming up in the near future for final hearing and the appellant having suffered a considerably long period of more than fifteen and a half years of incarceration and also the fact that appellant has been acquitted of all the offences of murder constituting his criminal antecedents and in the special circumstance of Covid-19 pandemic and also that nearly 20 years have elapsed since occurrence of the incident which in all probability must have diluted the feeling of animosity between the rival parties allowing wisdom and peace to prevail, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant by way of 3 CRA-374-2013 suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, I.A.4173/2020 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant-Jitendra Singh Tomar alias Tinku will remain under suspension subject to verification that the amount of fine has been deposited, on the appellant's furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned Magistrate for his appearance before the concerned Magistrate on 14/12/2020 and on such further dates as may be fixed by him which shall be of frequency not less than once in a year.
In case, appellant is found absent on any date fixed by the concerned Magistrate then the said Magistrate shall be free to issue and execute warrant of arrest for securing his presence without first referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.
Undoubtedly, the appellant is young/middle aged/able bodied responsible citizen. In the present time where the entire humanity is struggling to survive against the Covid-19 pandemic the governmental machinery is experiencing extreme shortage of hands in the process of disaster management, the appellant as citizen of nation is obliged to assist the govt. in times of this deep crises by discharging their fundamental duty enshrined under Article 51-A(d) 4 CRA-374-2013 which reads thus:-
"51A. Fundamental duties. - It shall be the duty of every citizen of India -
(a). XXX-XXX-XXX
(b). XXX-XXX-XXX
(c). XXX-XXX-XXX
(d). to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so;"
Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to pass suitable order prescribing it to be a part of one of the conditions subject to which appellant has been granted bail so that the human resource in shape of the appellant can be utilized for the betterment of the society and to ward off the crises.
The appellant through his counsel undertakes that petitioner shall register himself with the District Magistrate concerned as "Covid-19 Warriors" by entering his name in a Register named as COVID-19 WARRIOR REGISTER to be maintained in the o/o the concerned DM who in turn shall assign work to appellant of Covid- 19 disaster management at the discretion of District Magistrate, by taking all prescribed precautions. The nature, quantum and duration of the work assigned is left to the the wisdom of District Magistrate, concerned. This Court expects that the appellant shall rise to the occasion to serve the society in this time of crises to discharge his fundamental duty of rendering national service when called upon to do so, as per Article 51-A(d) of the Constitution. 5
CRA-374-2013 The appellant undertakes to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rs. Ten Thousand Only) within one week of his release on bail in the PM-CARES Fund for helping the disaster management process in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic and produce receipt before the registry of this Court of having done so within 30 days, failing which this Court may recall the order of bail. This gesture of appellant is appreciable.
The appellant will mark his attendance at the Police Station having territorial jurisdiction over the place of his residence once in a week, failing which this Court may consider recalling of this order.
The appellant shall not be found in the vicinity of the complainant and the eye-witnesses of the case.
Registry is directed to communicate about the passing of this order to the concerned District Magistrate for compliance.
The District Magistrate concerned is directed to intimate this Court in case the said condition is not complied with and on receipt of any such intimation, Registry is directed to list the matter before appropriate bench as PUD.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.c as per rules.
(Sheel Nagu) (Anand Pathak)
Judge Judge
ojha
YOGENDRA OJHA
2020.06.04
20:11:51 +05'30'