Sheela Bharti vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Matter is heard through video conferencing.

Record of the Court below has been received.

Heard on the question of admission.

Appeal is admitted for final hearing.

Also, heard on I.A.No.1117/2020 filed by the appellant/accused under section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of her jail sentence awarded by the Court of II Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, District-Bhopal in Session Trial No.337/2014 vide its judgment dated 07.01.2020 convicting the appellant/accused under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 07 years with fine of Rs.2000/- with default stipulation, Section 467 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 07 years with fine of Rs.2000/- with default stipulation, Section 468 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 07 years with fine of Rs.2000/- with default stipulation and Section 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for 02 years with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.

A s per prosecution case, complainant-Vikash Prajapati (PW-1) has lodged the written complaint against the present appellant alleging that she told about the plan of Mukhya Mantri Housing Plan for holding the Card of BPL, she gave assurance to allot the houses under the said scheme on 22.07.2013 and co-accused Anvar took Rs.70,000/- from the complainant and other persons, namely, Than Singh, Radha Gupta, Vimla Devi, Shivcharan, Sunil Chouhan, Preetam, Rakesh Gupta, Naresh and Shivkumar Chouhan. After that, when complainant and other persons inquired about the said matter then they found that present appellant and other co-accused person committed cheating with the complainant party. Thereafter, a case was registered against the present appellant and other co-accused person.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant-accused has been falsely implicated in this case. Accused-appellant is in jail since 07.01.2020 and she remained in jail during trial from 16.08.2013 to 04.10.2013 and 07.01.2020 to till now. There is no specific allegation against the present appellant for committing the aforesaid offence. Present appellant is a lady aged about 28 years. Prosecution has not able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts and there were major contradictions, omission and improvements in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the learned trial court has convicted the appellant without appreciating the facts of the case. Appellant did not receive any money from the complainant and other persons and she did not give any receipt to the complainant party whereas the said receipts were prepared and given by the co-accused-Anvar. Complainant-Vikas Prajapati (PW-1) has admitted this fact that he and other persons, namely, Than Singh, Radha Gupta, Vimla Devi, Shivcharan, Sunil Chouhan, Preetam, Rakesh Gupta, Naresh and Shivkumar Chouhan have given Rs.70,000/- to the co-accused-Anvar in Vallabh Bhawan Parking and in this regard, co-accused-Anver has given receipts to them. Allegation against the present appellant is that she introduced complainant and other persons to the co-accused-Anvar in the said house. This appeal is of year 2020 and appeal will take time to conclude due to COVID-19. There is fair chance to succeed in the appeal. There is no likelihood of her absconding. Under the circumstances, if the sentence of the appellant is not suspended, her right to file appeal will be futile. Hence, prayer is made for suspension of her jail sentence and grant of bail.

Learned P.L. has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection. Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, appellant is a lady, she is in jail since Digitally signed by SAVITRI 07.01.2020 and she remained in jail during trial from 16.08.2013 to 04.10.2013 and 07.01.2020 to till now, this appeal is of year 2020, final hearing of this appeal will take time and also looking to the statement of complainant-Vikas Prajapati (PW-1), but without commenting anything on the merit of the case, the said I.A. No.1117/2020 is allowed. It is ordered that subject to payment of fine amount, if not already deposited, the execution of jail sentence of the appellant-Sheela Bharti shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and she be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for her appearance before the trial court on 27.07.2020 and thereafter on all other such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the trial court in this regard.

I n view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the appellant shall also comply with the rules and norms of social distancing. Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-

The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the appellant by the jail doctor before her release.

2 . The appellant shall not be released if she is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the appellant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.

List this matter for final hearing in due course. C.C. as per rules.