Babu Kirar vs Madhyanchal Gramin Bank Shakha Lukwasa ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 12526 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Babu Kirar vs Madhyanchal Gramin Bank Shakha Lukwasa ... on 3 May, 2024

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                               1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                       CRR No. 1124 of 2024
                              (BABU KIRAR Vs MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK SHAKHA LUKWASA DISTRICT SHIVPURI M.P.
                                                      THROUGH BALRAM AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 03-05-2024
                                 Shri Akhilesh Dubey - Advocate for the petitioner.

                                 Shri Raju Shrama - Advocate for the respondent no.1/Bank.

Shri Dinesh Savita - Public Prosecutor for the State. Heard on I.A.No. 4732 of 2024, an application under Section 397(1) 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 r.w. 401 of the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment dated 20.02.2024 in Cr.A.No.244/2022 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri (M.P.) affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 04.07.2022 passed in SC NIA No.58/2017 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kolaras, District Shivpuri (M.P.) whereby, petitioner has been convicted and sentenced under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months with fine of Rs.3,20,737/-, with default stipulation.

It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the trial Court has

wrongly convicted the petitioner without appreciating the materials and evidence available on record. It is further submitted that petitioner has already suffered almost two and a half month of incarceration out of total jail sentence awarded to him. Further submission is that petitioner is ready to deposit 30% of the compensation / fine amount before the trial Court within a period of four weeks. Disposal of revision shall take considerable time, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence deserves to be allowed.

On other hand, counsel for the respondent-Bank has no objection to

prayer made by counsel for the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly, having regard to the undertaking given on behalf of counsel for the petitioner, but without expressing any opinion on merits, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed.

It is directed that jail sentence of petitioner shall remain under suspension and he be released on bail with an undertaking that he will deposit 30% of the compensation / fine amount as imposed by Court below within a period of four weeks from today, before learned trial Court and on his furnishing

personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The petitioner shall now appear before the Registry of this Court on 02.07.2024 and on all dates which may be given by the office for his appearance.

In case the petitioner fails to deposit the amount as directed above, no further time shall be granted to him and the trial Court shall take him into custody forthwith for serving remaining term of sentence.

A copy of this order be sent to Court concerned for compliance. Application (I.A.No. 4732 of 2024) stands disposed of.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

vpn