AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shailendra Shukla, J
Heard on IA No.2823/2020 which is an application filed under Section 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking suspension of sentence of appellant No.2-Shilpa Gaud who has been convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas, in ST No.216/2018 vide judgment dated 17.03.2020 and has been sentenced her as under:
Conviction
Sentence
Section & Act
Imprisonment
Fine Amount
Imprisonment in lieu of fine
147 IPC
01 year RI
Rs.1,000/-
03 months RI
307/149 IPC
10 years RI
Rs.5,000/-
03 months RI
324/149 IPC
01 year RI
Rs.1,000/-
03 months RI
302/149 IPC
Life Imprisonment
Rs.10,000/-
03 months RI
Learned counsel for the appellant No.2 submits that there are major contradictions in the deposition of witnesses and statements made under-Section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. It has been submitted that witnesses have stated that Shilpa and Narmada Bai had caught hold of the hand of deceased-Devendra, when co-accused Sunny inflicted fatal knife blows upon him. In the statement recorded under Section 161 of Criminal Procedure. However, it has been mentioned that appellant No.2-Shilpa Gaud was infact wanting to snatch knife from the hand of accused-Sunny so that he may not inflict knife injury on Devendra and in such pursuit, she had got injured.
Per contra, learned public prosecutor for the State was also heard and he has filed the written reply in which the deposition of witnesses had been discussed and it has been submitted that the order of conviction is appropriate and need no intervention.
A perusal of statements recorded under Section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code of witness Hari Verma (PW/3) Ex.D/6, Roshan Verma (PW/9), Ex.D/7 and Rakesh Verma (PW/10) are to the effect that appellant No.2-Shilpa Gaud had caught hold of the knife held by accused-Sunny, so that he may not inflict injuries on deceased-Devendra but accused-Sunny managed to inflict injury on Devendra. Even in the statement Ex.D/2 of Dayaram (PW/1), the same contradiction can be seen and, therefore, a ground is made out for grant of suspension of jail sentence of appellant No.2-Shilpa Gaud. Accordingly, the application-IA No.2823/2020 is being allowed.
It is directed that substantive jail sentence of the appellant No.2 - Shilpa Gaud shall be suspended subject to her depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited) and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one local solvent surety of like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for her appearance before the Registry of this Court on 24.11.2020 and on all other subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the Registry, in this behalf.
Accordingly, IA No.2823/2020 stands disposed of.
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy, as per Rules.