Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pradumn Verma vs Deepak Rathore on 14 October, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51254
1 CRR-3798-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3798 of 2024
PRADUMN VERMA
Versus
DEEPAK RATHORE
Appearance:
Shri Ramanuj Choubey, counsel for the applicant.
ORDER
This revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. has
been filed assailing the appeal judgment dated 03.06.2024, passed in
CRA No.21/2024 (Deepak Rathore Vs. Pradumn Verma) by Ist ASJ,
District Sehore, whereby, judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 13.06.2023 passed by CJM, Sehore in SC NIA No.327/2021
convicting the applicant for commission of offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing him to undergo one year
RI and payment of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation and 9% interest
thereupon with default stipulations, has been affirmed.
2. Heard on I.A.No.18623/2024, an application seeking exemption to
surrender.
3. On perusal of the memo of revision, it is apparent that despite this
court's direction since 02.08.2024 onwards till this day, applicant/accused
has not surrendered and is absconding and despite his conviction from
two Courts, he has not surrendered to serve the sentence imposed on
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51254
2 CRR-3798-2024
him. Rule 48 of Chapter-X M.P. High Court Rules, 2008 reads as
under:-
"48. A memorandum of appeal or revision petition against
conviction, except in cases where the sentence has been
suspended by the Court below, shall contain a declaration to
the effect that the convicted person is in custody or has
surrendered after the conviction. Where the sentence has been
so suspended, the factum of such suspension and its period
shall be stated in the memorandum of appeal or revision
petition, as also in the application under section 389 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.An application under
section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall, as
far as possible, be in Format No. 11 and shall be accompanied
by an affidavit of the appellant/applicant or some other person
acquainted with the facts of the case."
4. The Hon'ble Apex Court by order dated 30.07.2024, passed
in {[Special Leave (Criminal) Diary No.(s).20900 of 2024)] (Arising out
of impugned final judgment and order dated 25.01.2024, in CRLR
No.4402/2022 in the case of Daulat Singh Vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh} has held that a revision is not maintainable where accused has
not surrendered despite his conviction to serve the sentence imposed on
him and exemption cannot be allowed by High Court.
5. Hon'ble Apex Court considered the judgement of Vivek Rai and
Others Vs. High Court of Jharkhand, reported in (2015) 12 SCC 86 and
upheld the order of this court and held as under:-
"15. We do not, therefore, consider it appropriate to accept as
a sound proposition of law that a high court, in exercise of its
inherent power, may grant exemption from surrendering in a
particular case despite concurrent findings of conviction
oblivious of the duty of giving effect to orders passed under the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51254
3 CRR-3798-2024
Code and/or to prevent abuse of the process of a court."
6. As applicant has not surrendered, I.A.No.18623/24 an application
seeking exemption from surrender, is dismissed. Therefore, this revision
being filed in violation of Rule 48 of Chapter X of M.P. High Court
Rules is dismissed as not maintainable. Consequently, I.A.No.18621/24
an application under section 397 of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail also stands dismissed.
7. A copy of this order be sent down to the trial Court concerned
through Sessions Judge, Sehore (M.P.). Trial Court is directed to take all
necessary steps to commit the accused to jail to serve out the sentence.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
MKL
