Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lakhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 February, 2024
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 5111 of 2023
(LAKHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 13-02-2024
Shri Raj Kumar Swarnkar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sameer Verma, learned G.A. for the State.
Heard on I.A. No.2098/2024, which is an application filed under section
5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 4 years 7 months and 8 days.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of passing
of the impugned judgment by the Appellate Court the appellant was not present
before the Court therefore, he has no knowledge about the impugned judgment.
When he got arrested on 13.09.2023 then he got the knowledge about the
impugned judgment passed by the Appellate Court therefore, within limitation
he could not file this criminal revision. His mistake is bonafide therefore, the
delay caused in filing this criminal revision may be condoned.
3. Learned counsel for the State has objected the prayer and prayed for
its rejection.
4. On due consideration and the reasons assigned by counsel for the
petitioner the I.A. No.2098/2024 is allowed and the delay of 4 years 7 months
and 8 days caused in filing this criminal revision is hereby condoned.
5. Also, heard on I.A. No.16670/2023, which is an application for
dispensing with certified copy of order dated 15.10.2018.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that record of the appellate
court has been destroyed and in compliance of the order of this Court, the
Appellate Court has reconstituted the record and filed before this Court
therefore, petitioner is unable to file the certified copy of the Appellate Court. It
is also submitted that copy of the impugned judgment passed by the Appellate
Court is annexed with the record of the trial Court.
7. On due consideration, I.A. No.16770/2023 is allowed and the filing of
certified copy of the impugned judgment is hereby ignored.
8. Heard on the question of admission.
9. The criminal revision is admitted for final hearing.
10. Also, heard on I.A. No.16569/2023, which is first application
filed under Section 397 (1) of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence of
the petitioner.
11. The petitioner has been convicted under Sections 224 of the IPC and
sentenced them to undergo RI for 01 year with fine of Rs.500/- with default
stipulation vide judgement 21.01.2016 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Ujjain in Criminal Case No.7640/2013 and the petitioner has preferred an
appeal before the 5t h Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, in Criminal Appeal
No.351/2018 but the appeal is dismissed as time barred.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that short sentence of 1
year has been involved in this case. Hence, prayer is made for suspension of jail
sentence and grant of bail to the petitioner.
13. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer made by the
petitioner and prays for its rejection.
14. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
15. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the
fact that the final hearing of this revision is not possible in near future, without
expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the application I.A.
No.16569/2023 , is allowed and the jail sentence of the petitioner shall remain
suspended.
16. It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
deposited, petitioner- LAKHAN shall be released on bail, on furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand
Only) along with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial
Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on
23.04.2024 on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard,
till final disposal of this revision.
17. List for final hearing in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE
ajit
