Kamal Singh Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1302 MP

                                                                   1
                                         The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                   WP No. 1381 of 2022
                                          (KAMAL SINGH AHIRWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                  Jabalpur, Dated : 28-01-2022
                                        Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                        Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                                        Smt. Gulab Kali Patel, learned Government Advocate for the
                                  respondents/State.

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to consider his representation with regard to reinstatement in service in view of the fact that the conviction in the criminal case has been stayed by this Court in Cr.A.No.11186/2019 vide order dated 15.12.2021 read with order dated 29.11.2021.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the effect of staying conviction means that the conviction itself has been put in

abeyance though the criminal appeal is pending. In such situation, it would be deemed that the petitioner is not convicted.

In this regard he has already filed a representation (Annexure P/6) which is pending before the competent authority. He further submitted that directions may be issued to decide the representation in light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ravikant S. Patil vs. Sarvabhooma S. Bangali 2007 (1) SCC 673 as expeditiously as possible.

On the other hand, learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer and submitted that during pendency of the criminal appeal, the petitioner cannot be reinstated in service. Signature Not Verified SAN

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the fact Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.01.31 11:14:21 IST

that the conviction has been stayed by this Court, the respondent No.3 shall decide the pending representation dated 20.12.2021 (Annexure P/6) in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks and pass a reasoned and speaking order.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on

merits of the case.

With the aforesaid, this petition is disposed of.

(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE

vinay*

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR BURMAN Date: 2022.01.31 11:14:21 IST