Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhola@Ritesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 January, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRR-5836-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 5836 of 2024
(BHOLA@RITESH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 10-01-2025
Ms Rukmani Dhanger- Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Apoorv Joshi - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
Record of the Courts below has been received.
Revision being arguable, is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No.20247/2024, which is the first application under
Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on
behalf of revision petitioner - Manoj S/O Hukum Singh.
This criminal revision under Section 397 r/W Sec 401 of Cr.P.C. has been
filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.11.2024
passed by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Sanwer, District Indore(M.P.) in
Criminal Appeal No. 13/2023 confirming the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 17.07.2023 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sanwer
District Indore (M.P.) in Cr. Case No. 301/2017 whereby petitioner has been
convicted u/S 379 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 01 year Rigorous
imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulations.
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-5836-2024
evidence in proper perspective. Learned Counsel further contends that the learned
Appellate Court did not properly consider the contentions raised in the appeal.
Revision Petitioner remained in custody from 19.07.2017 to 29.07.2017 and
thereafter, petitioner is undergoing sentence of imprisonment from the date of
passing of judgment by the 1st Appellate Court i.e. from 11.11.2024. 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.
Per contra , learned Counsel for respondent/State opposes the application
and prays for its rejection.
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 - Manoj S/o Hukum Singh shall
remain suspended during pendency of this revision and he shall be enlarged on
bail subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
Trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-
(1). The revision petitioner shall deposit the amount of fine (if not
deposited) forthwith;
(2). The revision petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on
27.01.2025 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
3 CRR-5836-2024
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 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. 20247/2024 stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
sh
