Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rupesh Ravat @ Nandu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2023
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 8311 of 2022
(RAKESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA No. 7471 of 2022
(RUPESH RAVAT @NANDU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
CRA No. 12577 of 2022
(AJAY@ AJJU & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 15-02-2023
Shri Javed Khan, learned counsel for the appellant-Rakesh in Cr.A.
No.8311/2022.
Shri Vibhor Khandelwal, learned counsel for the appellant-Rupesh
Ravat@Nandu in Cr.A. No.7471/2022.
Shri T.C. Jain, learned counsel for the appellants-Ajay@Ajju and
Kala@Satpal in Cr.A. No.12577/2022.
Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.16425/2022, which is first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant-Rakesh in Cr.A. No.8311/2022.
Also, heard on I.A. No.11651/2022, which is first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant-Rupesh Ravat@Nandu in Cr.A. No.7471/2022.
Also, heard on I.A. No.16936/2022, which is first application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed under section 389 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellants-Ajay@Ajju and Kala@ Satpal in Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 16-02-2023 19:25:18 2. Cr.A. No.12577/2022.
The trial Court has convicted each of the appellants under section 302 read with section 149 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.06.2022 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, District-Dhar in S.T. No.20/2018.
As per prosecution case, intervening night of 27 and 28 December, 2017 someone assaulted the deceased Jairam. On 28.12.2017 at 9 a.m. it was found that the body of the deceased was lying in the agriculture field of Raja Seth situated at village Jamanda, Police Station- Navgaon, District-Dhar. On the basis of the information supplied by Chokidar Radheshyam, P.W.-1 Dehati Nalsi Exhibit-P/1 was lodged against unknown persons on the same day i.e. 28.12.2017 at 10:30 a.m. During investigation on 31.12.2017 statement of Durgibai, P.W.-11, who is sister of deceased Jairam, had been recorded by the police. On the basis of statement of P.W.-11 it was found that appellants and co-accused persons have assaulted the deceased and due to the injuries the deceased died.
Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the appellants have not committed any offence and they have falsely been implicated in the case. Initial FIR was lodged against the unknown persons. Thereafter, on 31.12.2017 appellants have been implicated in the case on the basis of case diary statement of Durgibai, P.W.-11. Further it is also submitted that Chokidar Radheshayam, P.W.-1, Mangilal ,P.W.-2, Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 16-02-2023 19:25:18 3. brother of the deceased Kailash, P.W.-3 and Jagdish, P.W.-5 had admitted in their cross examination that on the next day when they had present at the place where body of the deceased was lying on at that time Durgibai, P.W.-11 was also present but she did not disclosed the fact that appellants assaulted the deceased. She was silent after three days of the incident, therefore, her statement is not reliable. Durgibai, P.W.-11 in her deposition has not said anything about appellant- Rupesh. The trial Court has committed error in believing the statement of the witnesses. Appellant- Rakesh was in custody since 02.01.2018 to 30.04.2019, appellant-Rupesh was in custody since 02.01.2018 to 01.06.2018 , appellants Ajay@ Ajju was in custody since 02.01.2018 to 18.06.2018 and appellant- Kala@ Satpal was in custody since 02.01.2018 to 14.06.2018 and 16.11.2021 to 30.06.2022 and thereafter, all the appellants was in custody from the date of judgment i.e. 30.06.2022. Final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future therefore, it is prayed that remaining sentence of the appellants may be suspended and the appellants may be released on bail.
Per Contra, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer of the appellants and submitted that due to threat given by the appellants Durgibai, P.W.-11 has not disclosed the factum of the incident before 31.12.2017. FSL report also supports the case of the prosecution therefore, application for suspension of sentence of the appellants is liable to be rejected.
We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 16-02-2023 19:25:18 4.Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the evidence available against the appellants coupled with the fact that the final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the applications i.e. I.A. No.16425/2022, I.A. No.11651/2022 and I.A. No.16936/2022 are allowed and jail sentence of the appellants shall remain suspended.
It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited, appellants-Rakesh, Rupesh Ravat@Nandu, Ajay@Ajju and Kala@Satpal shall be released on bail, on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each along with separate sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for their appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 27.03.2023, and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A. for urgent hearing stands closed.
List all the appeals for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Ajit/-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 16-02-2023
19:25:18