Jagannath Singh vs Dileep Agrawal
2021 Latest Caselaw 1734 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.R. No.884/2021 Jagannath Singh Vs. Dileep Agrawal

Gwalior, Dated : 03.05.2021

Shri D.S. Chauhan, Counsel for the applicant.

Heard finally through Video Conferencing.

This criminal revision under Section 397, 401 of CrPC has

been filed against the judgment and sentence dated 22.02.2020

passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Guna in Cr.A. No. 420/2019

thereby affirming the judgment and sentence dated 20.07.2017

passed by JMFC, Guna in Criminal Case No.1861/2014, by which

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

has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months

and compensation of Rs.3,20,000/- and in default, simple

imprisonment of two years.

This criminal revision has been filed against the rejection of

application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, thereby rejecting

the prayer for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, and

consequently, the appeal has been dismissed as barred by time.

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant.

Admittedly, the applicant has not surrendered after the

dismissal of the appeal.

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

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.R. No.884/2021 Jagannath Singh Vs. Dileep Agrawal

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

revision must be accompanied by a declaration to the effect that the

convicted person is either in custody or has surrendered after his

conviction. Since the applicant has not surrendered, therefore, the

revision is not maintainable.

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 the Rule 48 of Chapter X of M.P. High Court

Rules, revision without surrender before the Trial Court is not

maintainable.

Since the applicant has not surrendered, therefore, this revision

is 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)
Abhi                                                           Judge
         ABHISHEK
         CHATURVEDI
         2021.05.04
         11:30:47 +05'30'