Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pradeep Tyagi vs Cbi Camp Bhopal on 15 July, 2020
Author: Sanjay Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Dwivedi
1 CRA-10276-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA-10276-2019
(PRADEEP TYAGI Vs CBI CAMP BHOPAL)
8
Jabalpur, Dated : 15-07-2020
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Amitab Gupta, counsel for the appellant.
Shri J.K. Jain, Assistant Solicitor General for the respondent.
This appeal has already been admitted for final hearing. Today it is listed for considering IA No. 5883/2020, an application for suspension sentence and grant of bail to appeal to appellant.
Learned counsel for the parties are heard on the aforesaid IA. Vide judgment dated 21st November, 2019 passed by the 9th Additional Sessions and Special Judge, CBI (VYAPAM cases), Bhopal the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for a period of 10 years rigorous imprisonment for the offences punishable under Sections 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code with fine of Rs.5000/- each. He has also been convicted for other offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 468 of IPC and Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Madhya Pradesh Recognized Examination Act, 1937 (for short 'Act of 1937') and sentenced for a period of 2 years and 3 years with fine of Rs. 1000/- each for the respective offence, with default stipulation.
As per the case of the prosecution, the appellant has been implicated as a Middleman in the case. He allegedly managed impersonators for original candidates in the examination conducted by the VYAPAM for the selection of Police Constable, known as Police Constable Recruitment Test, 2013. The STF, Bhopal, after receiving information, registered the offence under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B of IPC and Section 3(gha) (1) (2) read with Section 4 of the Act of 1937 against 31 persons including the present appellant.
After submitting final report, charges under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B of IPC and Section 3(gh)(1)(2) of the Act of 1937 were framed against the present appellant and other co-accused.
2 CRA-10276-2019 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the case, as from the impugned judgment itself it is clear that the present appellant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum of other co- accused. As per the learned counsel, this fact can be ascertained from the observation made by the trial court in paragraphs 13, 18 and 25 of the impugned judgment. He further submits that except the said memorandum, there is no material available against the present appellant, and, only on the basis of his memorandum and the memorandum of other co-accused, he has been made accused in the present case.
Learned counsel for the appellant has also placed reliance upon an order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 6763/2019- Rajbahadur Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh on 10.12.2019 allowing the application for suspension of sentence and granted bail of the appellant therein, who is also facing almost the similar charges and has been convicted and sentenced for a period of 10 years rigorous imprisonment and has served about nine months' jail sentence. Counsel submits that the present appellant has served almost three years of jail sentence out of the total sentence of 10 years and, therefore, his application should also be allowed.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present appellant is connected with all other respective crimes of committing fraud in the respective examination of selection of Police Constable and, therefore, considering the period of sentence awarded to him, the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail is liable to be rejected.
There are other connected appeals in which the applications of accused persons, who have been awarded maximum sentence of seven years RI, have been considered and they have been granted bail taking note of the fact that there is outbreak of pandemic (COVIED-19) in the country. However, liberty was granted to the learned counsel for the respondent that if so required, they may move an appropriate application so that the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail can be considered on merit, but, till today, no such application has been filed by the respondent.
3 CRA-10276-2019 Considering the aforesaid, the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the period of sentence served by the appellant, the fact that appeal would take a long time to be heard finally and also the fact that still there is outbreak of pandemic (COVID-19) in the country, without commenting on merit of the case, IA No. 5883/2020 is allowed. It is directed that remaining jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 21.09.2020 and on such other dates as may be fixed by the Registry in that regard.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned trial court through e-mail.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE RAGHVENDRA RAGHVENDRA SHRAN SHUKLA 2020.07.17 15:54:27 +05'30'