Rammilan vs Ramswaroop Patel
2023 Latest Caselaw 5002 MP

                                                                          1
                                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                                   CRR No. 903 of 2023
                                                      (RAMMILAN AND OTHERS Vs RAMSWAROOP PATEL AND OTHERS)

                                      Dated : 28-03-2023
                                             Kuldeep Patel - son of applicant present in person.

                                             Shri Y.D.Yadav - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

Advocates are abstaining from Court work today. Considered I.A.No.4849/2023, which is first application for suspension of sentence on behalf of applicants.

B y the impugned judgment, the applicants have been convicted for offence under section 494 (for accused Rammilan) of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I for 3 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and section 494 ( for accused Keshkali) and sentenced to undergo S.I for six months with fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.

It is submitted that the Courts below have not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record and committed error in convicting the applicants for the aforesaid offences. Maximum sentence awarded to the applicants is SI for 3 years. Applicant is in custody and this

revision would take considerable to dispose of finally. In view of the aforesaid, prayer is made to suspend the jail sentence of the applicants and to release him on bail.

Learned Government Advocate for the State has opposed the application.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, custody period of Signature Not Verified SAN

the applicant, period of jail sentence awarded to him and taking into account Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA CHOUBEY Date: 2023.03.29 09:54:58 IST that disposal of revision would take considerable time, I find it to be a fit case

to suspend the custodial sentence of the applicant, hence, without commenting on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, remaining jail sentence imposed upon the applicants - Rammilan and Keshkali shall remain suspended during the pendency of this case and they shall be released on bail.

The applicants shall appear before the trial Court concerned on 31.08.2023 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed in this regard

during the pendency of this revision, without fail.

I.A.No.4849/2023 is disposed.

Record be called The Division Bench in W.P. No.7295 of 2023 [IN REFERENCE (SUO MOTO) VS. CHAIRMAN, STATE BAR COUNCIL OF M.P. & OTHERS] passed a detailed order on 24.03.2023. The operative portion of t h e said order containing necessary direction are reproduced for ready reference:-

"(i) All the advocates throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh are hereby directed to attend to their court work forthwith. They shall represent their clients in the respective cases before the respective courts forthwith;

(ii) If any lawyer deliberately avoids to attend the court, it shall be presumed that there is disobedience of this order and he will be faced with serious consequences including Signature Not Verified initiation of proceedings for contempt of court under the SAN Contempt of Courts Act;

Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA CHOUBEY Date: 2023.03.29 09:54:58 IST

(iii) If any lawyer prevents any other lawyer from attending

the court work, the same would be considered as disobedience of these directions and he will be faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act;

(iv) Each of the judicial officers are directed to submit a report as to which lawyer has deliberately abstained from attending the court;

( v ) The judicial officers shall also mention the names of advocates who have prevented other advocates from entering the court premises or from conducting their cases in the court;

(vi) Such advocates shall be dealt with seriously which may even include proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act as well as being debarred from practice."

(Emphasis supplied) In view of absence of counsel for parties despite clear order of Division Bench in W.P.No.7295 of 2023, issue notices to the counsel for the parties as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. Notices be made returnable by the Registry.

List this case after ensuing summer vacation

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE

anu

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA CHOUBEY Date: 2023.03.29 09:54:58 IST