Madhya Pradesh High Court
Khalil Khan @ Khallo vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 September, 2022
Author: Sunita Yadav
Bench: Sunita Yadav
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA No. 6864 of 2022
[KHALIL KHAN @ KHALLO AND ANOTHER Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH]
Gwalior, dt.:07.09.2022
Shri Sankalp Sharma, learned counsel for appellants.
Shri Dheeraj Budholiya, learned Panel Lawyer for
respondent/State.
Shri Rohit Shrivastava, learned counsel for the complainant. Appeal being arguable is admitted for hearing. I.A.No.12641/2022, first application u/S.389(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of suspension of sentence moved on behalf of appellants is taken up and considered.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 25/07/2022 passed in S.T.No.500342/2015 by 9th Additional Sessions Judge, District Gwalior (M.P.) whereby the appellants have been convicted as under. :-
Section Imprisonment Fine
201 of IPC Three years' R.I. Rs.1,000/-with default
stipulation
It is submitted by learned counsel for appellants that the trial Court 2 has wrongly convicted the appellants without appreciating the materials and evidence available on record. He has further argued that there is nothing on record to show the involvement of the appellants in the alleged offence. It is further argued that the learned trial Court has not found the fact of conspiracy proved against the present appellants to committing the crime of murder. It is further argued that on the basis of seizure of t-shirt and mobile of the deceased, the appellants have been convicted, however, the independent seizure witnesses have turned hostile. Motive to commit crime is not found to be proved and the FIR has been lodged against unknown persons. The appellants have been awarded three years' R.I. u/S.201 of IPC for which they have already suffered one and half year of incarceration. It is further argued that there are lots of contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Disposal of appeal shall take considerable time, therefore, he prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the prosecution has 3 proved its case beyond doubt. Hence, prayed to reject the application.
Keeping in view, the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, the application (I.A.No.12641/2022) for suspension of sentence is hereby allowed.
It is directed that jail sentence of appellants will remain under suspension subject to depositing fine amount and on each of the appellants furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 12/10/2022 and thereafter on all subsequent dates as may be fixed by the office.
Application (I.A.No.12641/2022) stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules/directions.
(SUNITA YADAV ) JUDGE vpn VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI 2022.09.08 VALSALA VASUDEVAN 2018.10.26 15:14:29 -07'00' 09:56:47 +05'30'