Suneel Alias Sonu Raj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8621 MP

                                                                         1

                                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                AT JABALPUR

                                                                             BEFORE

                                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY
                                                                ON THE 29th OF JUNE, 2022

                                                      CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2024 of 2022

                                              Between:-
                                              SUNEEL ALIAS SONU RAJ S/O MUKESH RAJ,
                                              AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
                                              R/O HOUSE OF VINOD SINGH, SUNDAR NAGAR,
                                              ASHOKA    GARDEN,     BHOPAL   (MADHYA
                                              PRADESH)

                                                                                                    .....APPLICANT
                                              (BY SHRI PRIYANK CHOUBEY, ADVOCATE)

                                              AND

                                              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                              ARAKSHI KENDRA ASHOKA GARDEN BHOPAL
                                              (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                                              (BY SHRI PRADEEP GUPTA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                            This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                      following:
                                                                             ORDER

Heard finally at motion stage.

This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 26/04/2022 passed by 22nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Criminal Appeal No.1504/2022 (URR) whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the applicant's application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act and also Signature Not Verified SAN

dismissed the appeal arising out of judgement of conviction dated 26.11.2015 Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.06.30 15:36:28 IST

passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhopal in Criminal Case

No.11449/2014, whereby learned JMFC found the appellant guilty for the offences punishable under Section 25(1-B)(B) of IPC and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.

Brief facts of the case which are relevant to the disposal of this revision are that on the information of informant, police apprehended the applicant on 25.09.2014 and seized one knife from his possession which was illegally kept by the applicant in his possession and registered Crime No.522/2014 at Police Station Ashoka Garden for the offence punishable under Section 25 of Arms Act and after investigation of the crime filed charge sheet against applicant before JMFC, Bhopal. On that charge-sheet Criminal Case No.11449/2014 was

registered. Learned JMFC framed charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 25 (1-B)(B) of Arms Act and tried the case. However, the applicant abjured his guilt and took the defence that he has been falsely implicated in the crime, learned JMFC after trial found the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 25(1-B)(B) of IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid. The applicant filed an application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 (3) of CrPC before the trial court and prayed for giving time for filing an appeal against the judgment and for obtaining the order of suspension of sentence from the appellate court. Learned trial court allowed that application and temporarily suspended the sentence and gave time to the applicant and fixed the case on 26.12.2015, but the applicant neither filed the appeal nor appeared before the trial court on the date fixed. So the learned trial Court issued arrest warrant against the applicant for securing his presence. Thereafter,

Signature Not Verified SAN on 27/04/2019 the trial Court declared the applicant absconder and issued

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL perpetual arrest warrant against him for securing his presence before the Court. Date: 2022.06.30 15:36:28 IST

In compliance of that warrant, police arrested the applicant on 26/03/2022 and produced him before the trial Court. On that, learned trial Court sent him to judicial custody to undergo the sentence. Thereafter applicant filed Criminal Appeal No.1504/2022 (URR) against the judgment of conviction on 22.04.2022 along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay caused in the filing of the appeal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the applicant's application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and also dismissed the appeal as time-barred without considering it on merits. Being aggrieved from that order, the applicant filed this revision.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the counsel for the applicant did not inform him that he has to file the appeal within 30 days against the judgement of the trial court. Therefore, the accused did not appear before the trial court and did not file the appeal within the prescribed period. Learned trial court without appreciating this fact wrongly rejected the applicant's application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay in filing the appeal. So, the impugned order be set aside.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicant filed the appeal after a lapse of six years and four months and there is no plausible explanation regarding the delay in filing the appeal so learned Additional Sessions Judge did not commit any mistake in rejecting the

applicant's appeal as time-barred.

Although applicant filed the appeal after a long delay but applicant filed the appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence. In the cases where the applicant is in jail and files an appeal against the judgment of conviction and Signature Not Verified SAN

sentence, it is appropriate for the court to consider the appeal on merit rather Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.06.30 15:36:28 IST

than rejecting the appeal merely on the technical ground of delay. Learned trial

court without appreciating this fact rejected the applicant's application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in a mechanical manner. So, this revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the learned 22nd Additional Sessions Judge is hereby set aside and looking to the reason assigned by the applicant in his application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay in filing of Criminal Appeal No.1504/2022 (URR) is also allowed and delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. The matter is remanded back to the concerned Court with a direction that the concerned Court restore the appeal on its original number and decide the appeal on merit after giving the opportunity of hearing to both the parties. It is also directed to list the case before the concerned court for hearing of the appeal on 12.07.2022.

Office is also directed to send the record of Criminal Case No.11449/2014 and Criminal Appeal No.1504/2022 (URR) to the concerned court.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court for information and necessary compliance.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE (ra)

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.06.30 15:36:28 IST