Paramlal Yadav Alias Halkebhaiya vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Heard on I.A.No.29019/2025, which is third application for suspension of sentence on behalf of appellant/Paramlal Yadav.

Vide impugned judgment dated 16.6.2022 passed by First Additional District & Sesssions Judge, Chhatarpur in S.T.No.86/2021 the appellant has been convicted for offence under section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/-, and in default of payment of fine amount to suffer further R.I. for 03 months.

The allegation as found proved against the appellant is that he committed murder of Rakesh Rajput (since deceased) by means of a lathi.

Learned counsel for the appellant specifically submits that even if the prosecution case is taken as proved, there is no intention to cause murder or no knowledge to cause injury, which is likely to cause death on the part of the appellant. Even, according to Raghvendra Rajput (PW1) who is the brother of the deceased, the appellant dealt one blow on the head of the deceased. The death had occurred on the next day of the incident and if appropriate medical assistance would have been provided to him, then there was every possibility that he would not have succumbed to the injuries.

There are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. He further took us to the statement of Akash Rajput (PW4) who has stated that memorandum statement (Ex.P/9), seizure memo (Ex.P/10) and arrest memo (Ex.P/11) were signed at the police station which shows that the whole case is false and concocted against the appellant. It is further submitted that it is a counterblast case. The appellant has remained in custody for substantial period. There is no likelihood of early final hearing appeal of the appeal. The appellant is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the terms and conditions which may be imposed by the Court. On these grounds, prayer is made to suspend the custodial sentence of the appellant.

Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State has vehemently opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence and prays for its rejection pointing out the fact that there is direct evidence available on record against the present appellant in the commission of the offence under Section302 of IPC. The injury inflicted is on the vital part of the body i.e. head. Seizure made from the applicant is supporting the prosecution story.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The appellant is in custody for last 04 years. Even if the entire story is treated to be true, the appellant's offence would not travel beyond section 325 IPC as 'lathi' is not the lethal weapon. There is no previous animosity between the appellant and the deceased. There was no intention to kill the deceased. Even there is no x-ray to confirm the fracture on the head. Injury would have been caused by falling on the hard surface. There is no likelihood of final hearing of instant criminal appeal. Prima facie this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for suspension of remain part of custodial sentence of the appellant.

It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited, appellant/Paramlal Yadav shall be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for his appearance before the concerned trial Court firstly on 17.04.2026 and thereafter on such other dates as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard till the final disposal of this appeal.

I.A.No.29019/2025 is allowed.

List the case for final hearing in regular course.