Ravindra Sud vs Neeraj Handa
2021 Latest Caselaw 1732 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.R. No.4598/2019 Ravindra Sud Vs. Neeraj Handa

Gwalior, Dated : 03.05.2021

Shri Rahul Bansal, Proxy Counsel for Shri Kuldeep Thapak,

for the applicant.

Heard on the question of admission as well as for suspension

of sentence through Video Conferencing.

This criminal revision under Section 397, 401 of CrPC has

been filed against the judgment and sentence dated 04.07.2019

passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Cr.A. No.473/2017

thereby affirming the judgment and sentence dated 09.08.2017

passed by JMFC, Gwalior in Criminal Case No.7626/2015, by which

the applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of N.I. Act and

has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of two years

and a compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-.

It appears that the present revision has been filed without

surrendering after the dismissal of the appeal.

It is submitted by Shri Rahul that the Supreme Court in the

case of Bihari Prasad Singh VS. State of Bihar and another

reported in (2000) 10 SCC 346 has held that there is no provision in

CrPC, which requires that the applicant should be in jail before filing

the criminal revision and, accordingly, it is prayed that this revision is

maintainable.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.R. No.4598/2019 Ravindra Sud Vs. Neeraj Handa

Rule 48 of Chapter X of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008 reads as

under:-

"48. A memorandum of appeal or revision petition against conviction, except in cases where the sentence has been suspended by the Court below, shall contain a declaration to the effect that the convicted person is in custody or has surrendered after the conviction. Where the sentence has been so suspended, the factum of such suspension and its period shall be stated in the memorandum of appeal or revision petition, as also in the application under section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

An application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall, as far as possible, be in Format No. 11 and shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the appellant/applicant or some other person acquainted with the facts of the case."

Thus, it is clear that for maintaining the criminal revision, the

applicant must make a declaration to the effect that either he is in

custody or has surrendered after his conviction.

A coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Deepak Sahu

and others Vs. State of MP reported in 2012 (3) MPLJ 534 has

held that in view of Rule 48 of Chapter X of M.P. High Court Rules,

2008, revision without surrendering before the Trial Court is not

maintainable. Even otherwise, in the case of Bihari Prasad Singh

(supra), the Supreme Court has held that as per Rules of Patna High

Court, there is no such requirement that the applicant must surrender

before filing the criminal revision, whereas as already pointed out, as

per the provisions of Rule 48 of Chapter X of M.P. High Court Rules,

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.R. No.4598/2019 Ravindra Sud Vs. Neeraj Handa

2008, the revision must contain a declaration to the effect that either

he is in custody or has surrendered after his conviction..

Under these circumstances, it is held that the revision without

surrendering before the Trial Court is not maintainable.

It is, accordingly, dismissed as not maintainable. However,

the applicant is granted liberty to file a fresh criminal revision after

surrendering before the Trial Court.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge

Abhi ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI 2021.05.04 11:31:06 +05'30'