Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Datar Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 20 December, 2016

                                    Cr.A.1342/16
            (Datar Singh & Ors. Vs. State of MP)




20.12.2016
        Shri Raja Sharma, learned counsel for the
appellants.
        Shri Arun Barua, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.

Heard on the question of admission. Admit.

Record be called for.

Heard on I.A. No. 10575/2016, which is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of execution of sentence on behalf of the appellants.

Heard.

The appellant Datar Singh has been convicted under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for two years with fine of Rs.2000/-, under Section 323 IPC sentenced to undergo RI for three months and fine of Rs.500/-, appellant Ramsakhi Bai under Section 326/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and fine of Rs.2000/-, under Section 323 of IPC sentenced to undergo RI for three months with fine of Rs. 500/- and appellant Prem Bai has been convicted under Section 326/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and fine of Rs.2000/- and under section 323 of IPC sentenced to undergo RI for three months with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation vide judgment dated 28.11.2016 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha in Sessions Trial No.318/2013.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Cr.A.1342/16 (Datar Singh & Ors. Vs. State of MP) appellants that the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence and material and erred in convicting the appellants. The appellants were on bail during trial and they have not misused the liberty. There is no likelihood of earlier final hearing of this appeal, hence prayed for suspension of execution of sentence.

Learned Panel Lawyer opposed the prayer. Considering the statement of the witnesses, the material coupled with the fact that the appellants were on bail during trial and they have not misused the liberty and final hearing of this appeal is likely to take time, the application (I.A. No. 10575 /2016) is allowed. The execution of remaining jail sentence awarded to appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they shall be released on bail subject to their depositing the amount of fine and furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the Principal Registrar of this Court on 18.01.2017 and on such subsequent dates as may be fixed by the office.

Certified copy as per rules.

(D.K.Paliwal) Judge vv