Madhya Pradesh High Court
Atul @ Ashutosh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 August, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1294 of 2022
(ATUL @ ASHUTOSH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 31-08-2023
Shri Manoj Kushwaha - Advocate for appellants.
Smt. Saraswati Badhaiya - Panel Lawyer for the State.
Reserved on : 23.08.2023
Pronounced on : 31.08.2023
Arguments of both the counsel for the parties are heard at length.
Judgment and record of the Court below perused.
ORDER
Although the present case was reserved for judgment, but it was later revealed that other connected criminal appeals arising out of the same judgment have not been heard finally. Since all the three appeals should be decided by a common judgment, the matter is heard on the question of suspension of sentence upon request of learned counsel for the appellants.
Heard on I.A No.3683/2023, which is second application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, moved on behalf o f appellant no.1 Atul alias Ashutosh. His first application (I.A. No.2054/2022) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 28.7.2022 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Appellant no.1 has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 489(c) of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.3,000/-, with default stipulation as mentioned in the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellant no.1 is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He also submits that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on 2 record and committed error in convicting appellant no.1 for aforesaid offence. Appellant no.1 is in custody and the appeal would take considerable time to conclude. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the application for suspension of sentence may be considered.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and record of the court below.
In this case, appellant no.1 was convicted under section 489(c) of IPC for possessing fake currency notes worth Rs. 44,000/-. The enquiry report, Ex.P30, establishes that all the currency notes in possession of appellant no.1 were fake.
It is prayed in the suspension application that appellant no.1 is in long custody of almost two and a half years, but looking to the gravity of crime and also the evidence establishing the criminal act of appellant no.1 in which it is found proved that he knowingly had the fake currency notes in his possession with an intention to use them, this court is not inclined to suspend the sentence which was for five years RI.
The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE ps Digitally signed by PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Date: 2023.09.01 12:06:46 +05'30' Adobe Reader version: 11.0.8