AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In pursuance of the directions issued by the Apex Court and guidelines issued by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the wake of COVID-19 outbreak, the matter was taken up through video conferencing while adhering to the norms of social distancing prescribed by the Government.
I.A. No.15007/2020, an application for urgent hearing through video conferencing, accordingly, stands allowed.
Heard on I.A.No.15005/2020, which is third application under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of the appellant No.3 Taslim @ Chaudhary. Earlier two applications filed by appellant No.3 were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dt.31.01.2020 and 29.07.2020.
This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 18/04/2018 passed by the Special Judge (MPDVPK Act), Shivpuri, District- Shivpuri in S.T. No.400078/2014, whereby the appellant No.3 has been convicted as under:-
Sections
Sentence
Fine
Default Stipulation
395 of IPC
Life Imprisonment
Rs.5,000/-
2 Years RI
395/397 of IPC
Life Imprisonment
Rs.2,000/-
1 Year RI
460 of IPC
Life Imprisonment
Rs.2,000/-
1 Year RI
Prosecution story found to be proved against the appellants is that on 04/09/2014, the complainant lodged the report to the effect that the present appellant alongwith co-accused persons, armed with sticks and iron rods entered into the house of the complainant forcefully and committed robbery of valuable ornaments i.e. 450 gm silver and a pair of gold athana, two mobile phones, cash of Rs.14,165/- and other important documents and also assaulted the complainant and his family members, due to which, they received injuries.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant No.3 has been falsely implicated in the case. The appellant No.3 has suffered about six years' of incarceration against sentence of life imprisonment as awarded to the appellant No.3. FIR was lodged against three unknown persons. Learned counsel further submits that in view of COVID-19, outbreak detention of present applicant in already congested prisons may be detrimental. It is also submitted that there are fair chances of success of this appeal and the appeal may take long time for its conclusion and the appellant No.3 cannot be kept in custody for an unlimited period. The appellant No.3 is a permanent resident of District- Kannauj (U.P.) and he is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Under these circumstances, the execution of sentence be suspended and the appellant No.3 be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned Dy.Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent/State opposes the bail application. He further submitted that recovery has been made from the present appellant and he has been identified in the TIP. On such grounds, he prays for dismissal of the application.
Keeping in view of the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that an early hearing of this case is not possible, I.A. No.15005/2020 is allowed.
It is, therefore, directed that if appellant No.3- Taslim @ Chaudhary deposits the entire fine amount, if not already deposited, and furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 5th January, 2021 and on such subsequent dates as may be fixed in this regard, sentence of imprisonment awarded to him shall remain suspended till further orders and he shall be released on bail. The appellant No.3 shall also furnish a written undertaking that he will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders issued by the Central Government, State Government and local administration from time to time such as maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of Corona virus and the appellant shall also install Arogya Setu App. (If not already installed) in the mobile phone.
Learned Dy.Advocate General is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible by the office of this Court.
Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.