Samarth vs State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 22075 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Samarth vs State Of M.P. on 21 December, 2023

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                   1
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            AT GWALIOR
                            CRR No. 1003 of 2006
                             (SAMARTH Vs STATE OF M.P.)

Dated : 21-12-2023
       Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal - Advocate for the petitioner.

       Mr. Dinesh Savita - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.23195 of 2023, an application under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the sole petitioner.

The present Criminal Revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the impugned judgment of conviction and

order of sentence dated 30.11.2006 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ashoknagar in Criminal Appeal No.703/2006, confirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.10.2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ashoknagar in Criminal Case No.246/2005, convicting the petitioner under Section 49-A of Excise Act and sentencing him to undergo six months RI with fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 34(1-f) of Excise Act and sentencing him to undergo one month RI with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that courts below have

wro ngly appreciated the evidence and convicted the petitioners without appreciating the materials available on record. It is further submitted that recently he has been arrested in compliance of the order of this Court dated 07.12.2023, in such circumstances, due to mistake of counsel, party should not suffer as is settled principle of law. There are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. Disposal of revision shall take considerable time, therefore, the application for suspension of

sentence deserves to be allowed.

P e r contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, prayed to reject the application.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the application (I.A.No. 23195 of 2023) is allowed.

It is directed that the petitioners be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond by each of the petitioner in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction

of the concerned trial Court. The petitioners shall now appear before the Registry of this Court 13.02.2024 and on all other dates which may be given by the Office for his appearance till final disposal of this case.

List the case for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

(LJ*)

LOKENDRA JAIN 2023.12.22 16:14:27 +05'30'