Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jitendra @ Jittu Chourasia vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2015
Cr.A.No.2667/2013
Criminal Appeal No.2667/2013
27.2.2015 Shri Raman Patel and Shri L.C.Choursiya,
counsel for the appellant.
Shri Akshay Namdeo, Panel Lawyer for the
State/respondent.
Heard on I.A.No.2333/2015, an application under section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C.
The appellant is convicted of offence punishable under Section 394/397 of IPC and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.20,000/-.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the incident took place in 2 parts. One that the appellant and other co-accused persons robbed the victim Premchand (P.W.2) and his wife and thereafter, when the victim Premchand chased then accused persons, some other persons also came to hold the appellant and other accused persons. It is alleged by the victim Premchand that out of the accused persons, only one i.e. Pramod @ Pintu has fired from the gun, whereas Prahlad (P.W.7) has stated that all of the accused persons have fired from the gun. The victim Prahlad sustained a single injury of gun shot. No gun was recovered from the appellant. It was alleged that the appellant gave a memo under Section 27 of the Evidence Act that he Cr.A.No.2667/2013 got a sum of Rs.6,130/- and Voter ID card of the complaint in the aforesaid robbery. However, nothing could be recovered from the appellant and therefore, his memo is not admissible. The culprits who left the spot could not be identified. Their names were recorded in the FIR on the basis of memo given by co-accused persons, who were arrested immediately after the incident. Thereafter, no test identification parade has been arranged by the police against the appellant. Under such circumstances, there are fair chances of success of this appeal and if the application filed by the appellant is not accepted then, his appeal may turn infructuous. Under such circumstances, the appellant prays for bail and suspension of execution of his jail sentence.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the application.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and on considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the view that execution of jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended subject to deposit of fine amount. Consequently, I.A.No.2333/2015 is hereby allowed.
Execution of jail sentence directed against the appellant is hereby suspended subject to deposit of Cr.A.No.2667/2013 fine amount. He be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees thirty five thousand only) with one surety bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court to appear before the office of this Court on 24.4.2015 and on such other subsequent dates as may be given by this Court for that purpose.
Case be listed for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE Pushpendra