Madhya Pradesh High Court
Laxman Bijotia vs Smt. Urmila Singh on 23 April, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRR-750-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 750 of 2025
(LAXMAN BIJOTIA Vs SMT. URMILA SINGH )
Dated : 23-04-2025
Shri Ramesh Kumar Vishwakarma, Advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondent, despite service of notice.
Heard on the question of admission.
Revision being arguable, admitted for final hearing.
Record of the trial Court has been received.
Heard on I.A. No.3812 of 2025, which is the first application under Section
430(1) of BNSS 2023/397(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of
bail moved on behalf of revision petitioner - Laxman.
This criminal revision under Section 438 read with Section 442 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed against the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 17.01.2025, passed by VIII Additional Sessions Judge,
Ujjain, (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No.247/2024 affirming the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 04.10.2024, passed by Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Ujjain(M.P.) in SCNIA No.186/2022 whereby revision petitioner has
been convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced to
Rigorous Imprisonment for six months.
Learned Counsel for the revision petitioner contends that the revision
petitioner is falsely implicated in this matter. Both, the trial Court and the first
appellate Court, have committed error in convicting the revision petitioner
ignoring the inherent inconsistencies and improbabilities in the prosecution
evidence. Learned trial Court and the First Appellate Court did not appreciate the
2 CRR-750-2025
evidence in proper perspective. There was commercial dispute between the
parties. Learned Counsel further contends that the learned Appellate Court did not
properly consider the contentions raised in the appeal. There is no likelihood of
early hearing of revision in near future. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays
that execution of remaining jail sentence of revision petitioner may be suspended
and he may be enlarged on bail.
The contentions of revision petitioner has prima facie substance which
deserve consideration on merit. There is no likelihood of early hearing of revision
in near future. Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties, but without
commenting upon rival contentions touching merits of the case, this Court is of
the view that application deserves to be allowed. It is, accordingly directed that
execution of remaining jail sentence of revision petitioner - Laxman shall remain
suspended during pendency of this revision and he shall be enlarged on bail
subject to depositing 50% of the Cheque amount in question and upon furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) with one
solvent surety of Rs.5,00,000/- to the satisfaction of Trial Court for compliance
with following conditions:-
(1). The revision petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on
23.07.2025 and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3). The revision petitioner shall ensure hearing of the revision on the date
fixed for such hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on his
behalf, on the date notified for hearing.
In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order
granting suspension of sentence shall become ineffective.
The Trial Court shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance to
the revision petitioner on any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII
3 CRR-750-2025
Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2 of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
Where the revision petitioner does not appear on the date of his appearance
before the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the
Trial Court shall be authorized to issue non-bailable/bailable warrants to secure
his attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court. The Trial Court
shall also proceed under Section 446 of CrPC/491 of BNSS 2023 against such
revision petitioner and his surety without any reference to this Court and without
any impediment of the order granting bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of
M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
On arrest/surrender in compliance with the warrant, the revision petitioner
shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under
intimation to the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, I.A. No.3812/2025 stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
pn
