Madhya Pradesh High Court
Maqbul Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2022
Author: Anjuli Palo
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR
Criminal Revision No.2487 of 2021
Maqbul Khan
-Vs-
The Regional Officer, Pollution Control Board, Rewa
**************
For the applicant: Mr. Sourabh Sunder, Advocate
For the respondent: Mr. Ashish Shroti, Advocate
**************
PRESENT
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
=================================================
ORDER
(07/02/2022)
Heard on I.A. No.17938/2021, an application for exemption from
surrendering before the trail Court on account of medical emergency.
By way of this revision, the applicant has challenged the impugned
judgment dated 20.09.2021 passed by learned 3rd Additional Judge to the
Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi by which the lower
appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and sentence dated 12.01.2021
passed by CJM, Sidhi in RCT No.839/2015 whereby the appellant has
been convicted for offence under Section 15 of the Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986 and has been sentenced to undergo RI for one year
with fine of Rs.10,000/- and default stipulation.
3. The main grounds taken in the application is that the applicant
is a senior government officer and if he surrenders and is taken into
custody, the same will effect his service career. It is also averred that the
applicant is suffering from heart ailment and he is presently undergoing
treatment at Government Medical College, Shahdol and hence, he is not in
a position to attend the Court. It is further contended that the offence is
not under the Indian Penal Code but the applicant has been convicted
under the Environment Protection Act. It is further contended that there is
no previous criminal record of the applicant.
4. In addition to the above, the counsel for the applicant has filed
written arguments on behalf of the applicant in support of the application
wherein along with the other submissions, the applicant has elaborated the
aforesaid grounds. It is further contended that the applicant is aged about
60 years and is at the verge of retirement. It is stated that Hon'ble the
Supreme Court in catena of judgments have held that the High Court in
exercising its revision jurisdiction can entertain the matter on the ground
that the accused as not surrendered. It is further submitted that Section
397 of the Cr.P.C. does not prescribe for surrendering of the accused.
5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant
has placed reliance on the decisions in the cases of Bihari Prasad Singh v.
State of Bihar, (2000) 10 SCC 346; Vivek Rai and Another v. High Court
of Jharkhand, (2015) 12 SCC 86; Chelladuraj v. State, 2006 (2) MWN
(Cr.) 403; Rama Narang v. Ramesh Narang and Others, (1995) 2 SCC
513; Ravikant S. Patil v. Sarabhouma S. Bagali, (2007) 1 SCC 573; State
of TN v. A. Jaganath, (1996) 5 SCC 329; K.C. Sareen v. CBI,
Chandigarh, (2001) 6 SCC 584; Nirmal Sen v. State of MP, (CRR
No.37/2020); Amar Singh Kushwaha v. State of MP and Others, (CRR
No.400/2019); and Almitra H. Patel and Another v. Union of India and
Others, (2004) 13 SCC 538.
6. Various submissions have also been put forth regarding
merits of the case and illegality and perversity of the impugned orders.
However, this Court, at this stage, is concerned only with the application
filed by the applicant for exemption from surrendering.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
record. At this juncture, it is appropriate to refer to Rule 48 of the Chapter
10 of the MP High Court Rules 2008 which reads as follows:
"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 or some other
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."
8. The decisions on which reliance has been placed by the
applicant, mainly deal with exemption from surrendering of the accused in
exceptional circumstances. However the fact remains that the applicant
filed M.Cr.C. No.48457/2021 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure wherein the applicant had prayed for exemption from
surrendering. In the said case, this Court vide order dated 29.09.2021
relying on the decision in the case of Vivek Rai and Another v. High
Court of Jharkhand, (2015) 12 SCC 86 declined to grant exemption from
surrendering. In the said order, it was also held by this Court that there is
no exceptional circumstances to grant such exemption. The applicant was
also absconding at the time of pronouncement of the judgment.
9. Hence, I.A. No.17938/2021 is hereby dismissed.
10. As the application for exemption from surrendering of the
applicant has been dismissed as above, question of consideration of I.A.
No.17937/2021, an application for suspension of sentence does not arise,
at this stage. Hence, the applicant is directed to surrender before the trial
Court and file relevant documents in this regard before this Court.
(Smt. Anjuli Palo)
Judge
ks
Digitally signed by
KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN
SHUKLA
Date: 2022.02.10 23:25:30 -08'00'
