G.L. Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 603 MP

1 CRR-199-2021 The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh CRR-199-2021 (G.L. JAIN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 10-03-2021 Mr. Surendra Singh, learned senior counsel with Mr. Shashank Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Bhatnagar, learned P.L. for the State. Heard.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner herein who is

aggrieved by the order dated 11.01.2021 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa, in Criminal Appeal No.500345/2015, dismissing his appeal and thereby confirming the order of conviction and sentence dated 22.12.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khandwa, in Criminal Case No.5823/2006.

Also heard on I.A. No.1263/2021, which is an application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking exemption from surrendering. The petitioner herein is an 86 years old person and he is suffering from lumbar and spondylotic changes and on account of his advance age and medical

conditions, is unable to surrender before the learned Court below.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vivek Rai and another Vs. High Court of Jharkhand through Registrar General and others, reported in (2015) 12 SCC 86. In that case, a similar situation like the present one, arose before the Supreme Court. Like under the Rules of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, there were similar Rules under the Jharkhand High Court, which required the surrender of an accused/ petitioner within specified period before the revision petition U/s.397/401 of Cr.P.C. could be registered. The Constitutional validity of the said provision was challenged. The Supreme Court rejected the arguments against the Signature Not Verified SAN Constitutional validity of the said provision and held that similar provision

Digitally signed by ASHISH DATTA Date: 2021.03.10 18:36:06 IST 2 CRR-199-2021 also exists under the Supreme Court Rules, which required that the appellant must surrender before his case can be heard by the Supreme Court, where he has been convicted by the High Court. The Supreme Court however held that the requirement under the Supreme Court Rules did not affect the inherent powers of the Supreme Court to waive the requirement in a fit case. It also held that the inherent powers of the High Court does not prevent it

from exempting the personal attendance of an accused/petitioner notwithstanding, the bar under the High Court Rules, requiring the petitioner to first surrender.

In this particular case, as stated hereinabove, the petitioner is an 86 years old person. His conviction and sentence for one year under the old Prevention of Food Adulteration Act has been confirmed by the appellate Court for an act which is not even punishable with a jail sentence today, under the amended Food Safety & Security Act.

Be that, as it may, presently taking cognizance of the advance age of the petitioner and his medical problems, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction U/s.482 of the Cr.P.C. to meet the larger ends of justice, as nothing would be served in insisting upon a senior citizen aged 86 years just to surrender and go to jail to satisfy the operation of the High Court Rules and that too, looking to the present scenario created on account of Covid-19 Virus, where the petitioner comes under the high risk category.

Under the circumstances I.A. No.1263/2021 is allowed and the personal attendance of the petitioner before this Court is dispensed with and his presence shall be through his learned counsel at the time of hearing of this case.

Consequently, I.A. No.1345/2021, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail is allowed and it is directed that the remaining part of the jail sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended and he shall be enlarged on bail upon his furnishing a personal Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH DATTA Date: 2021.03.10 18:36:06 IST 3 CRR-199-2021 bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

The exemption of the petitioner from surrender is purely being granted looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, which has been taken note of and considered by this Court while deciding the aforesaid two I.As.

The jail authorities shall have the appellant checked by the jail doctor to ensure that he is not suffering from the coronavirus and if he is, he shall be sent to the nearest hospital designated by the State for treatment. If not, he shall be transported to his place of residence by the jail authorities.

The learned Court below is requested to accept the presence of the

petitioner herein through Video Conferencing in view of his advance age and other observations of this Court mentioned hereinabove and the date for such appearance of the petitioner shall be decided as per the convenience of the learned Court below.

The record of the learned trial Court be called for, in the meanwhile. List this case for final disposal at motion hearing stage on 29.07.2021.

C.C. as per rules, today.

(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE

a

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH DATTA Date: 2021.03.10 18:36:06 IST