Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunny @ Jitendra vs State Of M P on 3 August, 2022
Author: Amar Nath Kesharwani
Bench: Amar Nath Kesharwani
--1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
CRA No. 595 of 2014
(GOLU @ MAHESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
&
CRA No. 875 of 2014
(SUNNY @ JITENDRA Vs STATE OF M P)
Dated :03-08-2022
Shri Virendra Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants in CRA
No.595/2014.
Shri Rishiraj Trivedi, learned counsel for the appellants in CRA
No.875/2014.
Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned G.A for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.6189/2021, which is the third application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the appellant - Golu @ Mahesh in CRA No.595/2014 & I.A. No.9850/2019, which is the first application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the appellant - Sunny @ Jitendra in CRA No.875/2014.
The appellants have been convicted vide judgment dated 06.03.2014 passed by learned 7th ASJ, Ujjain, District-Ujjain in S.T. No.289/2013. The conviction and sentence of the appellant - Golu @ Mahesh in CRA No.595/2014 and appellant - Sunny @ Jitendra in CRA No.875/2014 is as under:-
Conviction Sentence
Section & Act Imprisonment Fine deposited Imprisonment in lieu
details of Fine
Sec.302 of I.P.C. Life Rs.10,000/- One year SI
imprisonment
--2--
Sec. 201 of IPC 3 years R.I. Rs.1000/- Six months SI
The prosecution story in brief is that on 05.03.2013, Digvijay Singh, police constable No.1262 (PW-8) received discrete information to the effect that the deceased Deepu Nai is missing and appellants- Golu, Sunny and Vijay are also not seen in the locality and about 7-8 days before dispute arose between the appellants and deceased (Deepu Nai) on the transaction of money and from that day the Deepu Nai was missing and suspected that he was murdered by the appellants and dead body was thrown somewhere, then, constable Digvijay Singh (PW-8) went to Anand Nagar at the resident of Deepu Nai (deceased) and found that the house was locked, then he searched for the appellant and about discrete information, he informed SHO, Rakesh Mohan Shukla (PW-16). That information was entered into "daily diary" at No.255 at 08.15 a.m. (Ex.P-
32). On 05.03.2013, at around 08.30 a.m., SHO, Rakesh Mohan Shukla (PW-16) and police team left for the crime scene and on the same day at around 10.30 a.m., the appellant- Golu @ Mahesh was taken into custody and his disclosure statement (Ex.P-2) was made, in which Golu @ Mahesh informed that on 26.02.2013, he along with other co-accused persons had caused the injuries to deceased (Deepu Nai) using stone and knife and thrown his body in a well situated at the house of the deceased. After that the investigation officer (PW-16) broke the lock of the house of the deceased in presence of the witnesses and in that regard, Panchnama (Ex.P-1) was prepared and "Naksha Mouka" (Ex.P-7) was also prepared. As per disclosure statement (Ex.P-2) of appellant-Golu, the dead body of the deceased (Deepu Nai) was found floating in the well
--3--
and was retrieved and Panchnama (Ex.P-6) was made in which various injuries on the body of the deceased were found. The dead body was then sent to the police hospital, Ujjain for postmortem and according to the postmortem report Ex.P-11, the time of the death of the deceased was 7- 10 days before the postmortem and the cause of the death was "profuse hemorrhage and shock as a result of stabbed incised wound injuries over chest and vital organs" and opined that the nature of the death was homicidal.
During investigation, blood stains, which were swapped with cotton from the floor of the place of incident, iron lock, which was broken to enter the house of the deceased, three white buttons, one red button, one half burnt "Beedi" and one "cigarette bud" were collected in different plastic bags vide seizure memo Ex. P-9. During investigation, On 06.03.2013 appellant- Vijay @ Sabji (appellant in Cr.A. No.436/2014) and Sunny @ Jitendra were also taken in custody and disclosure statement (Ex.P-38) of appellant Golu @ Mahesh was recorded and on that disclosure statement, blood stained cover of sofa-set was recovered from the well as per seizure memo Ex.P-28 and on the disclosure statement (Ex.P-39) of appellant Sunny @ Jitendra, blood stained T-shirt and knife were recovered as per seizure memo (Ex.P-30 & Ex.P-49) and as per disclosure statement of appellant Vijay, blood stained shirt was seized as per seizure memo Ex.P-50 and stone was seized as per seizure memo Ex.P-29. The finger prints expert, who went with FSL team to the crime scene and collected plastic jug, steel jug, mirror, knife, a box of McDowell's Whiskey, a bottle of country made liquour, three steel glasses, two quarter bottles, one bottle Liberty Whiskey with the
--4--
probability of finding finger prints were collected, as per seizure memo Ex.P-12, among the aforementioned object, the transparent bottle of "Liberty Whiskey" was analysed under the magnifying glasses after applying the powder, finger prints were found on it. With the help of photographer Vijay Singh (PW-17) photographs Ex.p-13 and 14 were taken. After the proceeding of FSL team, investigation officer seized one bottle of foreign liquour and seizure memo Ex.P-10 was made.
During investigation, finger prints of the appellants and blood samples of the appellants were taken and seized article and blood stained glasses and finger prints were sent for chemical examination and other investigation proceedings were done. Upon completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed under Sections 302, 201/34 of IPC. After that the case was committed to the sessions court and then the same was made over to 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain. The trial court framed the charges against appellants under Section 302, 302/34 and 201 of IPC, who denied the charges and pleaded for trial. After evaluating the evidence that came on record the trial court found the appellants guilty and convicted and sentenced as mentioned hereinabove. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the appellants have filed these criminal appeals before this Court.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been wrongly convicted and sentenced for the offence and the conviction is bad in law. The appellants have been falsely implicated in the case. They have nothing to do with the alleged crime. The learned trial court has erred in not appreciating the evidence in right prospect. It is also submitted that the case is based on circumstantial evidence, deceased was
--5--
history-sheeter and motive of murder was not proved. Appellants are in custody since the date of arrest, hence, they are in jail for more than 9 years and this is an appeal of 2014 and there is no possibility of early hearing of this appeal in near future, hence, prays for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail to the appellant.
Learned Govt. Advocate opposes the applications for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Considering the finger prints report (Ex.P-20), DNA report (Ex.P-
48), FSL report (Ex.P-71), over all facts, totality of the circumstances and the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and also considering the role attributed to the present applicants, we are not inclined to allow I.A. No.6189/2021 and I.A. No.9850/2019 and thereby rejected.
C.c as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA ) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
N.R.
Digitally signed by
NARENDRA KUMAR
RAIPURIA
Date: 2022.08.10 17:06:58
+05'30'