Madhya Pradesh High Court
Asha Gupta vs Premvati Saket on 24 July, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 2319 of 2023
(ASHA GUPTA Vs PREMVATI SAKET AND OTHERS)
Dated : 24-07-2023
Shri D. S. Chouhan - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Tpan Bathre - Advocate for respondent no.1.
Shri Devendra Shukla - Panel Lawyer for respondent no.2-State.
Reserved on : 21.07.2023.
Pronounced on : 24.07.2023.
.......................................................................................................
Arguments of respective counsel for the parties are heard at length.
Judgment and record of the Court below perused.
ORDER
Heard on I.A No.3452/2023, which is first application filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the appellant.
T h e appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.2,000/-, Section 466 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.2,000/-, Section 468 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- and Section 471 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- respectively, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He also submits that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record and committed error in convicting the appellant for aforesaid offences.
2Appellant is in custody and the appeal would take considerable time to conclude. She is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the application for suspension of sentence may be considered.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the objector oppose the application and pray for its rejection.
The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 466, 468 and 471 of IPC for committing cheating by forging a document, i.e. mark-sheet, and using the same to secure a Government job. There is evidence on record to show that the said mark-sheet filed by the appellant was a forged one and on its basis the appellant had secured the job of Anganwadi Karyakarta. Though the appellant has relied upon the statement of prosecution witness, namely Arunesh Tiwari (P.W.3), who has admitted that the said mark-sheet of appellant was verified in an enquiry conducted by the Collector wherein it was found to be a genuine one, and the appeal against that enquiry report filed before the Commissioner was also dismissed, but it is noteworthy that neither the enquiry report of Collector nor the decision taken in appeal by the Commissioner has been submitted by the appellant in her defence.
Merely an oral admission made by a witness is not sufficient to prove the defence version. In the light of verification report of mark-sheet and the corresponding evidence, this Court does not find it to be a fit case to suspend the sentence of appellant.
The application is, therefore, dismissed.
List this case for final hearing in due course.
Digitally signed by PRASHANTANURADHA SHUKLA) SHRIVASTAVA Date: 2023.07.25 17:28:14 +05'30' JUDGE Adobe Reader version: 11.0.23 3 ps