High CourtsDivision Bench

Mahesh Yadav vs State Of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 7 July 2020 · Citation: (2020) 07 MP CK 0188

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sheel Nagu, J · Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 389(1) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302, 498A
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 221 Of 2015
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 617 words

I.A. No.7491/2020, an application for urgent hearing, is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard through video conferencing on I.A. No.7492/2020, which is sixth application for grant of bail and suspension of sentence moved by the sole appellant u/S 389(1) of Cr.P.C.

This Criminal Appeal assails the judgment dated 11/03/2015 passed in Sessions Case No.286/2013; whereby, appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:-

S.No.

Sections

Sentence

Fine

In lieu

1.

498-A of IPC

One year RI

Rs.1000/-

One month further RI

2.

302 of IPC

Life Imprisonment

Rs.1000/-

One month further RI

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this is the sixth application for grant of bail and suspension of sentence. Earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn on 19/02/2020 with liberty to revisit this Court after suffering some reasonable period of custody. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Court below has failed to appreciate the contradictions and omissions in the evidence of important prosecution witnesses. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has suffered about 7 years & 17 days incarceration against the life imprisonment awarded by the Court below. There are two small kids in his family and no one is at home to look after them. It is admitted fact and evident from paragraph 2 of the judgment that the deceased, who was the wife of the present appellant, herself poured kerosene oil on her and committed suicide. This fact came on record by the statements given by the prosecution witnesses who are the children of the deceased. It is further submitted that in the last dying declaration (Ex-D148), deceased herself had stated that she got burnt accidentally due to falling of Chimney on her. Hence, prays for grant of bail and suspension of sentence.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, on case for grant of bail is made out.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the period of incarceration already suffered by the appellant and that there is no likelihood of early disposal of the present appeal in the near future, without entering into the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant by way of suspension of sentence.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, IA.7492/2020 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant will remain under suspension subject to verification that the amount of fine has been deposited, on appellant's furnishing bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned Magistrate for his appearance before the concerned Magistrate on 15.12.2020 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 is found absent on any date fixed by the concerned Magistrate then the said Magistrate 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.

Let e-copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for information.

C.c as per rules.