Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay @ Raja @ Pepsi @ Yogesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 May, 2025
1 CRA-1199-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 1199 of 2022
(AJAY @ RAJA @ PEPSI @ YOGESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 16-05-2025
Shri Harish Joshi - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Rahul Solanki - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.2414/2025, fourth application under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the appellant-Ajay @ Raja @ Pepsi @ Yogesh S/o Kailash Chand Jat. His first application filed by two counsel have been dismissed vide order dated 19.01.2023 and second application has been dismissed on 23.02.2024.
The appellant stands convicted under Section 376(2)(N), 506 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years RI with fine of Rs.8,000/-, 7 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000/- with usual default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this impugned judgment submits that he is pressing this application on the ground of custody of the appellant. The appellant is in jail since 17.04.2017 and he has completed jail sentence of 8 years out of 10 years of sentence awarded to the appellant. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective. There are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgment suffers from surmises and conjectures. The appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. It is further submitted that the appeal being of the year 2025 is not likely to be heard finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour of the appellant. Hence, under such circumstances Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 16-05-2025 18:42:03 2 CRA-1199-2022 prayer is made for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved against the present appellant. He fairly admits that the appellant has completed 8 years of jail sentence out of 10 years of sentence awarded to him Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, coupled with the fact that possibility of final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak and period of incarceration, without expressing any conclusive opinion on merits, I find it to be a fit case to suspend the remaining custodial sentence of the appellant.
Accordingly, application is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of the appeal is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-
(1) The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited) forthwith;
(2) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 14/07/2025 and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3) The appellant shall ensure hearing of the appeal on the date fixed for such hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on his behalf, on the date notified for hearing.Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 16-05-2025 18:42:03
3 CRA-1199-2022 In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order granting suspension of sentence shall become ineffective. The Trial Court shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance to the appellant on any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
Where the appellant do not appear on the date of his appearance before the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the Trial Court shall be authorized to issue non-bailable / bailable warrants to secure his attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court.
The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. / Section 491 of BNSS, 2023 against such appellant and his surety without any reference to this Court and without any impediment of the order granting bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
On arrest / surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellant shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under intimation to the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off. List for final hearing in due course.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) JUDGE RJ Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 16-05-2025 18:42:03