Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj And Ors. vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 December, 2022
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 754 of 2013
(MANOJ AND ORS. AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-12-2022
Shri Palash Choudhary - Advocate for appellants.
Shri Bhaskar Agrawal - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.15101 of 2022 which is an application for urgent hearing for bail application.
For the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed.
Heard on IA No.14525 of 2022 which is an application for suspension of sentence though inadvertently it is mentioned to be application for temporary suspension of sentence.
The appellants have been convicted under Sections 302 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.1000/- respectively with default stipulations.
Counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have undergone actual sentence more than 11 years in custody. There is no criminal antecedents of the appellants.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment reported in (1994) 6 SCC 731 (Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing Undertrial Prisoners vs. Union of India and others) and followed in Criminal Appeal No.1640 of 2010 (Thana Singh vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics) decided on 30.08.2010 has held Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by that if the convict has undergone a sentence of more than fifty percent of what SAN SOUMYA RANJAN DALAI Date: 2022.12.14 11:55:46 IST has been awarded to him, the same shall constitute a ground to the Court to consider while enlarging him on bail.
2On considering the facts, we do not find that the exceptions as pointed out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the order dated 05.10.2021 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.4633 of 2021 (Saudan Singh Vs. The State of U.P. and others) are applicable herein.
Since the appellants have already undergone the custody of almost more than 11 years, we are of the view that they require to be enlarged on bail on that ground itself.
Consequently, I.A. No.14525 of 2022 is allowed. The remaining jail sentence of the appellants is suspended.
Appellant No.1 - Manoj Damami and appellant No.2 Dilip are enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with separate solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for their appearance before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ratlam on 15.03.2023 and thereafter, on such other subsequent dates as may be fixed in that behalf.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA))
JUDGE JUDGE
soumya
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.12.14
11:55:46 IST