Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hitesh Goyal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 March, 2021
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1 CRR-969-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRR-969-2021
(HITESH GOYAL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
1
Gwalior, Dated : 26-03-2021
Shri Mahendra Singh Rawat, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Alok Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
I.A. No.9651/2021, an application for urgent hearing is considered and
allowed.
Heard on the question of admission.
This criminal revision appears to be arguable, hence it is admitted for
final hearing. Record of the courts below be requisitioned.
Also heard on I.A. No.9652/2021, which is first application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the petitioners.
This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment dated
18.03.2021 passed by Second Additional Sessions/Special Judge (POCSO
Act), Shivpuri, District Shivpuri in Cr.A. No.500058/2016 arising out of the
judgment dated 25.01.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Shivpuri, District Shivpuri in case No.22/2015, whereby the petitioners have
been convicted under Sections 498-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo six
months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/-, under Section 4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced to undergo six months' rigorous
imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- alongwith default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners has
been wrongly convicted. It is further submitted that during trial the petitioners
were on bail and they did not misuse the liberty granted to them. The
petitioners have also deposited the fine amount and the trial Court has already
suspended the sentence of the petitioners. It is also submitted that there are
fair chances of success of this revision and the revision may take long time
for its conclusion and the petitioners cannot be kept in custody for an
unlimited period. Under these circumstances, the execution of sentence be
2 CRR-969-2021
suspended and the petitioners be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State opposes the bail application.
Keeping in view of the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the
petitioners and the facts and circumstances of the case, I.A. No.9652/2021 is
allowed.
I t is, therefore, directed that if petitioners deposit the entire fine
amount, if not already deposited, and furnish a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) each with one solvent surety of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of trial Court for their appearance
before the Registry of this Court on 05th July, 2021 and on such subsequent
dates as may be fixed in this regard, sentence of imprisonment awarded to
them shall remain suspended till further orders and they shall be released on
bail. The petitioners shall also furnish a written undertaking that they 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.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)
JUDGE
shanu*
SHANU
RAIKWAR
2021.03.26
17:12:51 -07'00'
