SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(MP) 148

ATUL SREEDHARAN
Vijay @ Cheeku – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
A. P. S. Tomar, Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

ORDER

1. None present for the appellant as the counsel for the appellant has abstained from work on account of the call given by the State Bar Council.

2. The prosecutrix is present in person along with her youngest child. She is married to the appellant. The appellant is in jail since his conviction by the Ld. trial Court.

3. Today matter is listed for orders on I.A. No.18472/2022 for suspension of sentence. Earlier, two applications for suspension of sentence have already been dismissed on merits vide order dated 6.1.2022 and 27.6.2022. Learned counsel for the State has prayed that the application may be dismissed as there is no change in circumstances.

4. This Court asked the prosecutrix what she has to say about the case as she has appeared in person. The prosecutrix says that she has studied up to Class 7th. Though literate, she cannot read a Hindi Newspaper. She further says that she can only sign her name in Hindi. According to the prosecutrix, from the time the appellant was enlarged on bail pending trial till he was sent to prison to undergo his sentence, the prosecutrix and the appellant had got married and they have three children whose names are Akash aged about six yea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top