Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mukul Jain vs Archi Cunstruction Through Propriter ... on 6 June, 2024
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRR No.2643 of 2024
(MUKUL JAIN VS. ARCHI CONSTRUCTION & ORS.)
Dated : 06-06-2024
Shri V.D. Sharma - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Ashish Saxena - Advocate for respondent No.1.
I.A. No.11414/2024, an application for urgent hearing during
vacation is taken up and allowed.
I.A. No.10599/2024, an application under Section 5 of Limitation
Act for condonation of delay is taken up, considered and allowed for
the reasons mentioned therein.
Delay of 336 days in filing this criminal revision stands
condoned.
The revision appears to be arguable, therefore, it is admitted.
Record of the trial Court is available.
Heard on I.A. No.10598/2024 an application under Section 397
(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of jail sentence
filed on behalf of the petitioner - Mukul Jain.
This revision is directed against the impugned judgment of
conviction dated 25.09.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge,
Special Court No.4, Electricity Act, 2003, Gwalior (M.P.) in Criminal
Appeal No.227/2023, whereby the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class Gwalior (M.P.) vide
judgment dated 21.03.2023 in Case No. SC-NIA/4507747/2015 was
affirmed by which the petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo one year's RI and
compensation to the tune of Rs.26,09,500/-, in default of payment of
compensation the petitioner shall further undergo three months' rigorous
imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of
Rs.26,09,500/-, complainant has received Rs.20 lacs from the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that the petitioner will pay
remaining Rs.6,09,500/- before furnishing personal bond. In view of the
aforesaid, it is prayed that the application for suspension of sentence be
allowed.
On due consideration of submissions and on perusal of the
impugned order and the documents filed on record, and further
considering the fact that the petitioner is also ready to pay remaining
compensation amount of Rs.6,09,500/- before furnishing personal bond,
this Court is of the considered opinion that the application for
suspension of custodial sentence deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the
case, IA No.10598 of 2024 is allowed and it is directed that subject to
payment of remaining compensation amount of Rs.6,09,500/- and on
furnishing a personal bond by the petitioner in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for her regular appearance
before concerned trial Court, the execution of the custodial part of the
sentence imposed against the petitioner shall remain suspended, till the
final disposal of this revision. It is made clear that if this order is not
complied with by the petitioner, this order shall be cancelled
automatically without further reference to the Court.
The petitioner, after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his
presence before the concerned trial Court on 05.08.2024 and on all such
subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard.
List the case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
V. JUDGE
ojha
