Bharat Singh & Others vs State Of M.P.

This Criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 28/07/2010 passed in Sessions Trial No.118/2007 by Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad, Distt. Bhind (M.P.), whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:-

Sections

Sentence

Fine

In default

302/149 of IPC

Life Imprisonment

Rs.1,000/-

Six Months RI

307/149 of IPC

Five Years RI

Rs.1,000/-

Six Months RI

148 of IPC

One Year RI

-

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that due to inadvertent mistake, two applications, i.e. I.A. No.10603/2019 & I.A. No.9737/2020 have been filed for suspension of jail sentence on behalf of appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh. Therefore, learned counsel for the appellants prays that I.A. No.9737/2020 be dismissed as not pressed.

As prayed by learned counsel for the appellant, I.A.No.9737/2020 is dismissed as not pressed.

I.A.No.10603/2019, third application for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail moved by appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh, is taken up and considered.

It is submitted by learned counsel for appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh that trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant. There are lots of contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. This is third application for suspension of jail sentence of appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh. Last application was dismissed as withdrawn on 03/04/2017. It is further submitted that at the time of passing of impugned judgment, appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh was of 65 years of age. The impugned judgment was passed on 28/07/2010. The date of incident is 16/10/2006. There is no possibility of final hearing of this case in near future looking to the COVID-19 situation. It is also submitted that as appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh is in custody since more than 14 years, therefore, looking to the age of appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh, i.e. around 75 years, and considering the present COVID-19 condition, learned counsel for appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh prays for suspension of his jail sentence and grant of bail.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the application and prays for rejection of the same.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and considered the arguments advanced by them.

Considering the only fact that appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh is aged around 75 years, there is no likelihood of early disposal of the present appeal in near future and looking to the incarceration period suffered by the present appellant, without entering into the merits of the case, this court is inclined to grant bail to appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh by way of suspension of sentence.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, I.A.No.10603/2019 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh shall remain under suspension subject to the verification that the amount of fine has been deposited, on the appellant's furnishing bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned CJM for his appearance before the concerned CJM on 11/01/2021 and on such further dates as may be fixed by him which shall be of frequency not less than once a year.

In case, appellant No.1 - Bharat Singh is found absent on any date fixed by the concerned C.J.M then the said C.J.M shall be free to issue and execute warrant of arrest for securing his presence without first referring the matter to this Court, provided the Registry of this Court is kept informed.

The learned concerned magistrate and the prosecution are directed to ensure following of COVID-19 precautionary protocol prescribed from time to time by the Supreme Court, the Central Govt. and as well as the State Govt during release, travel and residence of the appellant during period of suspension of sentence as a consequence of this order.

E-copy/Certified copy as per rules.