[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shayada vs Anil on 1 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34995
1 CRR-3885-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 1 st OF DECEMBER, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3885 of 2024
SHAYADA AND OTHERS
Versus
ANIL
Appearance:
Shri Ghan Shyam Yadav - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Mohan Lal Patidar - Advocate for the respondent.
(Heard on 26.11.2025)
(Delivered on 01.12.2025)
ORDER
This criminal revision under section 397 read with section 401 of the
Cr.P.C.,1973 is preferred being aggrieved by order dated 11.07.2022
(Annexure-P/1) in MJCR No.41/2022 by JMFC, Rajpur District- Barwani
(M.P.) whereby the application against the revision petitioners for recovery
of amount due Jahangir Khan through recovery warrant and attachment of
movable and immovable property of the revision petitioner and in default for
recovery of amount by detaining them in prison have been entertained.
2. Facts in brief are that in SCNIA No.300312/2015 vide judgment
dated 02.09.2021 by JMFC Rajpur, District Barwani (M.P.) Jahangir Khan
was convicted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and
was sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year and Jahangir Khan was ordered to
pay compensation of Rs.2,56,750/- to respondent under section 357 (3) of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34995
2 CRR-3885-2024
the Cr.P.C., 1973. Jahangir Khan was awarded 3 months RI in default of
payment of compensation. Conviction and sentenced was challenged through
criminal appeal No.48/2021 before the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge,
Barwani (M.P.). During the pendency of the appeal, Jahangir Khan died on
24.01.2022 and the appeal was dismissed as abated vide order dated
29.04.2022. Thereafter, respondent filed an application for recovery of rest
of the compensation amount submitting that Rs.51,350/- has been deposited
by Jahangir Khan. Revision petitioners are bound to pay the rest of the
amount because movable and immovable property of Jahangir Khan have
been devolved to them. He further submitted that document filed through IA
No.17105/2024 are to the affect that compensation of Rs. 10 lacs have been
awarded to revision petitioner due to the motor vehicle death of Jahangir
Khan in MACT No.86/2022 by the National Lok Adalat dated 09.09.2023
Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Indore (M.P.).
3. Challenging the legality of proceedings of JMFC, Rajpur, District-
Barwani (M.P.) this revision petition is preferred.
4. Heard.
5. Counsel for the respondent opposed the revision petition.
6. Perused the record.
7. Proceeding of the JMFC, Rajpur, District- Barwani (M.P.) reveals
that on 01.07.2023 the application was preferred and vide order dated
04.11.2022 the application was registered as execution case and notices were
issued to the revision petitioners. Thereafter vide order dated 17.04.2023
bailable warrant was issued and vide order dated 12.07.2023 the order was
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34995
3 CRR-3885-2024
issued to RTO, Indore that vehicle No.MP-09-GH-1518 be not transferred
and vide order dated 24.02.2024 recover warrant/ arrest warrant was issued
and vide order dated 02.07.2024 revision petitioner no.2 Shayada and
revision petitioner no.4 Heena were released on bail. On 02.08.2024 present
revision petitioners filed objections. Further the arrest warrant/ recovery
warrant were issued and challenging the proceedings this revision petitioner
is preferred.
8. In Rakesh Ranjan Shrivastava vs The State of Jharkhand INSC 2022
INSC 205 it is held in para-12 that the mode of recovery of compensation
will be as provided in section 421 of the Cr.P.C., 1973.
9. section 421 of the Cr.P.C. the mode of recovery of payment are as
below:-
"421. Warrant for levy of fine.-- (1) When an
offender has been sentenced to pay a fine, the
Court passing the sentence may take action
for the recovery of the fine in either or both
of the following ways, that is to say, it may--
(a) issue a warrant for the levy of the amount
by attachment and sale of any movable
property belonging to the offender;
(b) issue a warrant to the Collector of the
district, authorising him to realise the amount
as arrears of land revenue from the movable
or immovable property, or both, of the
defaulter:
Provided that, if the sentence directs that in
default of payment of the fine, the offender
shall be imprisoned, and if such offender has
undergone the whole of such imprisonment
in default, no Court shall issue such warrant
unless, for special reasons to be recorded in
writing, it considers it necessary so to do, or
unless it has made an order for the payment
of expenses or compensation out of the fine
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34995
4 CRR-3885-2024
under section 357.
(2) The State Government may make rules
regulating the manner in which warrants
under clause (a) of sub-section (1) are to be
executed, and for the summary determination
of any claims made by any person other than
the offender in respect of any property
attached in execution of such warrant.
(3) Where the Court issues a warrant to the
Collector under clause (b) of sub-section (1),
the Collector shall realise the amount in
accordance with the law relating to recovery
of arrears of land revenue, as if such warrant
were a certificate issued under such law:
Provided that no such warrant shall be
executed by the arrest or detention in prison
of the offender."
10. Accordingly, the application for recovery of amount against
revision petitioner does not stand on the scrutiny of section 421 of the
Cr.P.C., 1973. It was required from the respondents to apply for issue of a
warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any movable
property belonging to the Jahangir Khan providing the details of the property
or for issuance of warrant to the Collector of the district, authorising him to
realize the amount as arrears of land revenue from the movable or
immovable property of Jahangir Khan or both of the defaulters. The present
applications does not satisfy the above procedure and the proceedings before
the court have been conducted by ignoring the provisions of section 421 of
the Cr.P.C. Hence, criminal revision is allowed and proceedings in MJCR
No.41/2022 passed by the JMFC, Rajpur District- Barwani (M.P.) is set
aside.
11. Respondent may proceed to recover the amount as per section 421
of the Cr.P.C., 1973.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:34995
5 CRR-3885-2024
12. With the aforesaid, criminal revision is disposed off.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
ajit
