Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhuru @ Bhundara vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 17 April, 2014
Criminal Appeal No.636/2014
17.04.2014
Ms. Neetu Prajapati, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, P.L. for the
respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.4213/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under section 394 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there is no direct and indirect evidence against the appellant regarding the alleged offence. He is in jail since long. He has no criminal past. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.4213/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant Bhuru @ Bhundara is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Revision No.592/2014 17.04.2014 Shri J.A. Shah, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, P.L. for the State. Heard on admission.
Admit.
Call for the records of both the courts below. Also heard on I.A. No.6108/2014, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicants.
The applicants have been convicted under section 325/34 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/- each, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants were on bail during trial and have never misused the liberty of bail. The revision would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of applicants be suspended and they be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that if applicants furnish a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) each and execute a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the execution of the sentence of imprisonment passed against them shall remain suspended and they shall be released on bail. Applicants shall now appear before the Registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this revision.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Revision No.573/2014 17.04.2014 Shri Ashok Kumar Koshta, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, P.L. for the State. Heard on I.A. No.5900/2014, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicant.
The applicant has been convicted under section 379 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.2000/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was on bail during trial and he has never misused the liberty of bail. The revision would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of applicant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that if applicant furnishes a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) and executes a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the execution of the sentence of imprisonment passed against him shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail. Applicant shall now appear before the Registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this revision.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.3801/2014 17.04.2014 Shri G.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Umesh Pandey, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard finally.
The applicants have an apprehension of their arrest in connection with Crime No.59/2014, registered at Police Station Bargi, District Jabalpur for offence punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 470 of Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have not committed any offence and have been implicated falsely. It is submitted that no offence under aforementioned sections of I.P.C. is made out against the applicants.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the application.
Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants. Consequently, their application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
It is directed that in the event of arrest, present applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Police Officer.
The applicants Smt. Pratibha Parte and C.P. Soni shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required. They shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1102/2014 17.04.2014 Shri Pushpendra Dubey, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.7390/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under section 327 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.10,000/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and has never misused the liberty. It is further submitted that the appellant has also been released on bail even after conviction though for a limited period. He has already deposited the fine amount. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the short term of sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.7390/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1096/2014 17.04.2014 Ms. Versha Kothari, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.7362/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under section 325 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.10,000/- , with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and has never misused the liberty. It is further submitted that the appellant has also been released on bail even after conviction though for a limited period. He has already deposited the fine amount. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the short term of sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.7362/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1093/2014 17.04.2014 Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.7330/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under sections 354 and 457 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.2000/- and R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.2000/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and has never misused the liberty. It is further submitted that the appellant has also been released on bail even after conviction though for a limited period. He has already deposited the fine amount. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the short term of sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.7330/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1078/2014 17.04.2014 Ms. Gayatri Ladhiya, Advocate for the appellants. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.7227/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants No.2 and 3.
The appellants No.2 and 3 have been convicted under sections 326/34, 323/34 and 323/34 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.10,000/-, R.I. for 3 months with fine of Rs.1000/- and R.I. for 3 months with fine of Rs.1000/-, each respectively, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants were on bail during trial and have never misused the liberty. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellants are the bread earner in their family. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellants be suspended and they be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant No.2 Arvindra Dubey and appellant no.3 Shivam Dubey, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.7227/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant No.2 Arvindra Dubey and appellant no.3 Shivam Dubey is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellants No.2 and 3 shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1062/2014 17.04.2014 Shri G.P. Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.7091/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under section 376 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.250/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and has never misused the liberty. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant is only bread earner in the family. He has already deposited the fine amount. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.7091/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 27.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.942/2014 M.Cr.C. No.5232/2014 15.04.2014 Shri Abdhesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, P.L. for the respondent No.2/State.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Case diary is not available but there is sufficient material on record.
Heard finally.
The applicant has an apprehension of his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.80/2014 by police of Police Station Sarai, District Singrouli for offence punishable under section 376 of Indian Penal Code.
As per prosecution case, on 12.10.2013 the applicant has forcibly taken the complainant in his motorcycle and committed rape with her without her consent.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been implicated falsely due to enmity. It is submitted that initially a report was made for offence under section 354 of I.P.C. but during the complaint case No.80/2014 the prosecutrix stated that she was raped by the applicant, thereafter offence has been converted under section 376 of I.P.C.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the application.
Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Consequently, his application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
It is directed that in the event of arrest, present applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Police Officer.
The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.5103/2014 15.04.2014 Shri Arubendra Singh Parihar, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, P.L. for the State. Heard on admission.
Admit.
Case diary is available.
Heard finally.
The applicant has an apprehension of his arrest in connection with Crime No.37/2013, registered at Police Station Badera, District Satna (M.P.) for offence punishable under sections 25(1)B of Arms Act and section 3/5 of Explosive Substance Act.
As per prosecution case, on 20.03.2013 the police has recovered 94 pig killar bomb and 1/2 kg Potash in the house of applicant and other co-accused persons.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the challan has been filed. It is further submitted that nothing has been seized from the possession of the applicant.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the application.
Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Consequently, his application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
It is directed that in the event of arrest, present applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Police Officer.
The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.4132/2014 15.04.2014 Smt. Sangeeta Sharma, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, P.L. for the State. Heard on admission.
Admit.
Case diary is not available.
Heard finally.
The applicant has an apprehension of his arrest in connection with Crime No.240/2005, registered at Police Station Gourjhamar, District Sagar (M.P.) for offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code.
As per prosecution applicant along with 13 others have been tried in S.T. No.164/2006 before the Sessions Court, Sagar and as per judgment dated 22.12.2006 all of them have been acquitted but in the case of applicant it is alleged that for the aforesaid offences since beginning he is absconding, therefore, he is liable to be tried for the same incident.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the complainant along with others has filed affidavit stating that complainant has no objection in releasing the applicant. It is also submitted that applicant was not present on the spot at the time of incident.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the application.
Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Consequently, his application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
It is directed that in the event of arrest, present applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Police Officer.
The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1026/2014 09.04.2014 Shri V.C. Rai, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, P.L. for the State. Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.6854/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under sections 456 and 354 of I.P.C. and section 7 read with section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.1000/-, R.I. for 3 years and R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.1000/- respectively, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is in jail since the date of his arrest and has already served the jail sentence of more than 9 months. He has already deposited the fine amount. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of jail sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.6854/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 08.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.942/2014 09.04.2014 Shri Sushil Tiwari, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, P.L. for the State. Heard.
Admit.
Call for the record.
Also heard on I.A. No.6224/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under section 354 of I.P.C. and section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.500/- respectively, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and he has never misused the liberty of bail. Learned counsel further submitted that there are various contradictions and omissions in the statement of prosecution witnesses. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of jail sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.6224/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 09.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Revision No.612/2014 09.04.2014 Shri Pushpendra Kumar Dubey, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, P.L. for the State. Heard on admission.
The revision seems to be arguable, hence admitted for final hearing.
Call for the record of the courts below. Also heard on I.A. No.6343/2014, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicant.
The applicant has been convicted under section 392 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was on bail during trial and he has never misused the liberty of bail. The revision would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of applicant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that if applicant Goverdhan @ Godu furnishes a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) and executes a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the execution of the sentence of imprisonment passed against him shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail. Applicant shall now appear before the Registry of this Court firstly on 09.10.2014 and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this revision.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.558/2014 09.04.2014 Shri B.R. Vijaywar, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, P.L. for the State. Heard on I.A. No.3807/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under sections 363, 366 and 363 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.5000/-, R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.5000/- and R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.5000/- respectively, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was on bail during trial and he has never misused the liberty of bail. It is submitted that the prosecutrix went for labour work at Hyderabad on their own and the appellant had not taken them forcefully or against their will. Learned counsel further submitted that there are various contradictions and omissions in the statement of prosecution witnesses. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.3807/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 09.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.493/2014 09.04.2014 Shri Chandra Mohan Parnami, Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, P.L. for the State. Heard.
Admit.
Heard on I.A. No.4513/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that he is not pressing the bail application I.A. No.4513/2014 so far as it relates to appellant No.1 Prem Korku.
Accordingly, I.A. No.4513/2014 in respect of appellant No.1 Prem Korku is hereby dismissed as not pressed.
The appellant No.2 Poonam has been convicted under sections 363, 366 and 376 of I.P.C. and has been sentenced to R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.1000/-, R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.3000/- and R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.5000/- respectively, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there are various contradictions and omissions in the statement of prosecution witnesses. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant No.2 Poonam be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant No.2 Poonam s/o Sukhlal Korku, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.4513/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant No.2 Poonam is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant No.2 Poonam shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 08.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1819/2013 09.04.2014 Shri Anoop Saxena, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey, P.L. for the State. Heard on I.A. No.2237/2014, which is an application under section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under section 376 of I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there is undue delay in lodging the F.I.R. and for which no explanation has been given. It is further submitted that the doctor who conducted M.L.C. did not find any injury and did not give any definite opinion regarding the rape. Learned counsel further submitted that there are various contradictions and omissions in the statement of prosecution witnesses. The appeal would take considerable time for its final disposal, hence jail sentence of appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I.A. No.2237/2014 is allowed.
Remaining jail sentence of appellant is hereby suspended and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and furnishing the personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant shall be released on bail with further direction to appear before the registry of this Court firstly on 08.10.2014, and also on such other dates as may be fixed by the registry in this regard during the pendency of this appeal.
List the case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy today.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.13249/2013 05.04.2013 Shri Shailesh Tiwari, Advocate for the applicants.
Shri V.K. Pandey, P.L. for the respondents/State.
This petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the applicants for quashing of F.I.R. dated 07.10.2012 registered as Crime No.288/2012 for the offence under sections 294, 506, 323/34 of I.P.C. at Police Station, Maharajpur, District Mandla (M.P.).
The facts of the case in short are that on complainant Dr. Kherul Haque Naskar lodged a written report on 04.10.2012 at about 9:30 a.m. to the effect that applicants along with his companions and employees are digging plinth by the side of the house of complainant and are keeping woods near the wall of his house. On asking not to do the same the applicants threatened to kill the complainant and his family members. On this report the F.I.R. was registered against the applicants under sections 294, 506/34 of I.P.C. as Crime No.288/2012 at police station Maharajpur, District Mandla. After completion of the investigation the charge sheet was filed on 23.10.2012 in which offence under section 323 of I.P.C. has been added.
The main contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the first written report was filed at 4.10.2012 at 9:30 a.m. and subsequently second report was filed on 06.10.2012 at 10:30 a.m. but the F.I.R. has been registered on the basis of second written report dated 6.10.2012. It is submitted that the F.I.R. dated 07.10.2012 is contrary to the provisions of section 154 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the respondent no.2 has deliberately ignored the initial report of complainant dated 4.10.2012. It is also submitted that the subsequent report dated 6.10.2012 is false, fabricated and imaginary. On the aforesaid grounds it is submitted that the F.I.R. be quashed and the applicants be discharged from the aforesaid charges.
M.Cr.C. No.3604/201403.04.2014 Ms. Jyoti Shivhare, Advocate for the applicants. Heard on admission.
Issue notice to the respondent on payment of P.F. within seven days by ordinary as well as registered A/D mode.
List after four weeks.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.3406/2014 03.04.2014 None present for the applicant. Shri Manoj Kushwaha, Advocate for the respondent.
List in the next week.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.R. No.434/2014 03.04.2014 Shri Brahmanand Pathak, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the respondent No.1/ State.
Case diary be made available on the next date of hearing positively.
List the case on 16.04.2014.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.A. No.218/2014 03.04.2014 Shri R.B. Gautam, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. As prayed for by the learned counsel for the appellant, list after two weeks.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.13614/2013 03.04.2014 Shri D.K. Melani, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. Issue fresh notice to the respondent on payment of process fee within seven days by ordinary as well as registered A/D mode.
Be listed for hearing on 06.05.2014.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm M.Cr.C. No.4894/2013 03.04.2014 Shri K.L. Gupta, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. As prayed for by the learned counsel for the appellant, list after a week.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.A. No.2029/2013 03.04.2014 Shri D.K. Melani, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. As prayed, this appeal be listed for analogous hearing along with Cr.A. No.2028/2013.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.A. No.1223/2013 03.04.2014 Shri Gurpreet Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks for a week's time to cure the default.
Prayer is allowed.
List after a week.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.R. No.1108/2013 03.04.2014 None present for the applicants. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. In compliance of order dated 06.02.2014 report dated 15.02.2014 has been received from the office of Superintendent, Central Jail, Sagar.
As per the report, applicant no.1 Manish S/o Harish Rathore of this criminal revision has completed his jail sentence, therefore, he has been released on 01.02.2014.
In view of the aforesaid, this criminal revision is dismissed as abated in respect of applicant No.1 Manish.
So far as applicant no.2 Jamna Jatav is concerned, office is directed to get information from the Central Jail, Sagar as to whether applicant no.2 Jamna Jatav is in custody or not. Report be submitted within two weeks.
Also issue production warrant of the applicant no.2 Jamna Jatav so that the Superintendent of Central Jail, Sagar may produce the applicant no.2 Jamna Jatav before this Court on the next date of hearing.
List on 25.04.2014.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.A. No.927/2013 03.04.2014 Shri Shailendra Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. List the case on 09.05.2014 for personal appearance of the appellant.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.A. No.911/2013 03.04.2014 Ms. Durgesh Nandini, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. List the case on 09.05.2014 for personal appearance of the appellant.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Cr.A. No.874/2013 03.04.2014 None present for the appellant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, P.L. for the State. This appeal is filed by the appellant from the Jail. Because previously appointed counsel is not present, in these circumstances, an Advocate be appointed through Legal Aid.
Office is directed to take necessary steps in this regard.
List the case on 09.04.2014.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge psm Criminal Appeal No.1045/2007 26.04.2014 Applicant Sharda Prasad Kumhar with Shri Vijit Sahu, Advocate.
Complainant/injured Lala Bhaiya with Shri R.L. Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Order passed separately, signed and dated.
(Tarun Kumar Kaushal) (K.L. Jatav)
Member Member
psm
Criminal Appeal No.432/2002
26.04.2014
Order passed separately, signed and dated.
(Tarun Kumar Kaushal) (K.L. Jatav)
Member Member
psm
Criminal Appeal No.901/2002
26.04.2014
Order passed separately, signed and dated.
(Tarun Kumar Kaushal) (K.L. Jatav)
Member Member
psm