Madhya Pradesh High Court
Parmal @ Bulkari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 October, 2023
Author: Sunita Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRR No. 4497 of 2023
(PARMAL @ BULKARI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 19-10-2023
Shri Rishikesh Bohare - Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Abha Mishra - Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State.
Heard on I.A. No.17978/2023, an application under Section 5 of
Limitation Act for condonation of delay.
The application is duly supported by affidavit.
In view of the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed.
Delay of 250 days in filing the revision is hereby condoned.
Also heard on I.A.No.17977 of 2023, first application under Section
397 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the petitioner.
The revision has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 397, 401
o f the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment dated 11/11/2022 in
Cr.A.No.11/2022 passed by Sessions Judge, District Ashoknagar (M.P.)
affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 24.12.2021 passed in
Criminal Case No.400299/2015 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ashoknagar
(M.P.) whereby, petitioner has been convicted and sentenced under Section
34(2) of Excise Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment of One Year with fine of
Rs.25,000/- with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Courts below have
wrongly appreciated the evidence and convicted the petitioner. It is further
submitted that independent witnesses have not supported the case of
prosecution and turned hostile in respect to seizure of liquor from the
possession of present petitioner. Further submission is that Investigating Officer
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR
AGRAHARI
Signing time: 19-10-2023
04:34:14 PM
(PW-7) JPS Tomar in his cross-examination at para 5 and 6 admitted that after
seizure of liquor, the seized articles were not deposited in the Court and were
kept in Police Station. He further admitted that despite passing of five years,
quarters were clean which is not possible. It is further argued that the petitioner
already suffered more than one month of incarceration out of total jail sentence.
Present revision is likely to take long time to come up for final hearing. Hence,
prayed to suspend the jail sentence of the petitioner looking to the short period
of jail sentence and release him on bail.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the application and
prayed for its rejection.
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.17977 of 2023) is allowed.
It is directed that the petitioners be released on bail on their furnishing
personal bond by each of the petitioner in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.
Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The petitioner shall now appear before
the Registry of this Court on 13.12.2023 and on all other dates which may be
given by the Office for his appearance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
vpn
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR
AGRAHARI
Signing time: 19-10-2023
04:34:14 PM
