Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil vs Suraj Singh on 13 February, 2025
1 CRR-6156-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 6156 of 2024
(SUNIL Vs SURAJ SINGH )
Dated : 13-02-2025
Shri Aman Malviya - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Vijay Gulani - Advocate for the respondent.
Heard on I.A.No.19801/2024, which is an application under Section 5
of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.
Delay of 121 days in filing the revision is duly explained in the
application, which is well supported by an affidavit, therefore, application is
allowed for the reasons stated therein and delay in filing the revision is
hereby condoned.
Also heard on the question of admission.
Record of both the Courts have been received.
Being arguable, the revision is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A.No.19674/2024, first application under Section 438 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of remaining jail
sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the applicant Sunil S/o Badri Lal.
The applicant stands convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo 06 months RI with compensation
of Rs.7,40,000/- with usual default stipulation and the order of conviction
and sentence has been affirmed by the appellate Court.
Learned counsel for the applicant while taking exception to this
impugned judgments submits that applicant is innocent and he has been
2 CRR-6156-2024
falsely implicated in this matter. Both the Courts below have not appreciated
the evidence in its right perspective. There are material contradictions and
omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgments suffers
from surmises and conjectures and have been passed ignoring serious
infirmities and anomalies. It is further submitted that present applicant is
suffering jail incarceration since 06/12/2024. The revision being of the year
2024 is not likely to be heard finally in near future. There is a strong case in
favour of the applicant. Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for
suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgments impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present applicant. He further submits that no amount has been
deposited so far by the applicant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case, looking to the evidence in entirety coupled with
the fact that possibility of final hearing of this revision in near future is
bleak, without expressing any conclusive opinion on merits, I find it to be a
fit case to suspend the remaining custodial sentence of the applicant.
Accordingly, application is allowed subject to deposit of 50% of the
cheque amount within a period of 30 days from today and subject to deposit
of fine amount, if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during
3 CRR-6156-2024
the pendency of the revision is hereby suspended and it is directed that
applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for compliance with
following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on 17/03/2025
and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3) The applicant 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 applicant on
any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2
of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
Where the applicant do 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 Cr.P.C. /
Section 491 of BNSS, 2023 against such applicant and his surety without any
reference to this Court and without any impediment of the order granting
4 CRR-6156-2024
bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
On arrest / surrender in compliance with the warrant, the applicant
shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under
intimation to the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Tej
