Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Alias Satyanarayan Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2025
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36905
1 CRR-3065-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3065 of 2025
SUNIL ALIAS SATYANARAYAN VERMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur - Advocate for the applicant.
Smt. Geeta Yadav - Govt. Advocate for respondent.
ORDER
Records of the Courts below has been received.
Heard on admission.
Prima facie, this revision seems to be arguable. Hence, admitted
for final hearing.
Heard finally.
This revision petition under Section 438/442 of BNSS, 2023 has
been filed by the applicants assailing the appeal judgment dated
27.06.2025 (Annexure-A/1) passed by learned Additional Session Judge,
Burhar, District Shahdol(MP) in Criminal Appeal No.08/2024 ( Sunil @
Satyanarayan Verma Vs. State of M.P. ) whereby learned Appellate
Court has partly allowed the appeal preferred against the judgment of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36905
2 CRR-3065-2025
conviction and order of sentence dated 11.3.2024 ( Annexure-A/2) passed
by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Budhar, District Shahdol (MP)
in Criminal Case No.594/2021 (State of M.P. Vs. Sunil @ Satyanarayan
Verma) whereby applicant/accused was convicted for commission of
offence under Sections 188 of IPC and Section 14 of M.P. State Security
Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for One month and R.I. for One year.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has
submitted that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the
applicant/accused under Section 14 of M.P. State Security Act passed by
the Appellate Court. It is submitted that only One Year sentence has been
awarded by the Appellate Court to the applicant for the said offence and
out of that, he has already suffered approximately a period of Five
months & 21 days so far. Therefore, it is prayed that jail sentence
awarded to the applicant may be reduced to the period of jail sentence
already undergone by him.
3 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State
has supported the findings given by the Appellate Court and has prayed
for dismissal of the revision.
4 . I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
findings recorded by the Courts below & the material available on
record.
5 . Learned Appellate Court has duly appreciated the oral and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36905
3 CRR-3065-2025
documentary evidence on record and has rightly come to the conclusion
that applicant has committed offence under Section 14 of M.P. State
Security Act. There are no reasons to interfere with the findings recorded
by the Appellate Court. Therefore, conviction of applicant for
commission of offence under Section 14 of M.P. State Security Act
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge being just and proper is
hereby affirmed.
6. As far as, prayer for reduction of jail sentence of applicant is
concerned, it is apparent that applicant has already suffered
approximately a period of five months & 21 days as substantive jail
sentence, therefore, I am of the view that it would be just and proper, if
jail sentence awarded to applicant is reduced/modified to the period
already undergone by him so far.
7. Therefore, having taken into consideration the above
submissions and others facts & circumstances of the case, it appears just
and proper to modify the sentence. Therefore, applicant's jail sentence of
RI for One year (as passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Budhar,
District Shahdol) for commission of offence under Section 14 of M.P.
State Security Act is modified and applicant/accused is sentenced to the
period of jail sentence already undergone by him. Thus, as far the jail
sentence of the applicants is concerned, it is modified and is reduced to
the period already undergone by him.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36905
4 CRR-3065-2025
8. Registry/trial Court is directed to prepare super-session
warrant/release warrant and to send the same to the Superintendent of
jail/Jail authorities concerned with a direction that if applicant/accused is
not required in any other case, he be released in this case forthwith.
9. The order of the Trial Court with regard to the disposal of the
property is affirmed.
10. Learned Trial Court is directed to ensure the aforesaid
compliance.
11. Consequently, this criminal revision is disposed of with the
aforesaid modification in the sentence.
12. Let records of the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court
along with copy of this order be sent down to Court concerned for
information and necessary compliance through the Sessions Judge,
Shahdol (MP).
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
mrs. mishra
