Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shushila vs Smt. Nitisha on 10 January, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia, Pranay Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:820
1 MCRC-30569-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
ON THE 10th OF JANUARY, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 30569 of 2024
SHUSHILA
Versus
SMT. NITISHA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Mohammed Anas Sheikh - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri H.S. Rathore - G.A. for respondent/State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Rusia
The petitioner has filed this present petition under Section 482 of Code
of Criminal Procedure seeking the restoration of MCRC No. 3678/2021 at its
original number.
2. The petitioner lodged an F.I.R. against the respondent No. 1 and 2 at
Police Station : Manak Chowk, District : Ratlam and they were tried under
Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code in S.T. No.
216/2008. After undergoing seven years period of trial, vide judgment dated
18.04.2015 they have been acquitted from all the charges by learned IVth
Additional Sessions Judge, Ratlam (M.P.).
3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid acquittal, the present petitioner
preferred a Criminal Appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before this Court
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:820
2 MCRC-30569-2024
which was registered as CRA No. 821/2015. The petitioner withdraw the said
appeal on 29.09.2018 with liberty to file proper application under Section
378(3) for grant of leave to appeal in view of the law laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of Satyapal Singh vs. State of M.P. and Others reported in
(2015) 15 SCC 613 . Thereafter, the petitioner filed MCRC No. 3678/2021
on 19.01.2021 with the delay of 1731 days. The petitioner has filed an
application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of
delay.
4. The MCRC came up for hearing on 31.10.2023 since the law laid
down by the Apex Court in the case of Satyapal Singh (supra) has been
overruled by the Apex Court in the case of Mallikargun Kodagali (Dead)
represented through Legal Representatives vs. State of Karnataka and Others
reported in (2019) 2 SCC 752. The petitioner sought withdrawal of MCRC
No. 3678/2021 with the liberty to file an application for revival of CRA No.
821/2015. In disposed of CRA No. 821/2015, the petitioner filed an I.A. No.
19322/2023 for revival of CRA No. 821/2015 and the said application was
objected by the respondents by submitting that MCRC No. 3678/2021 with a
delay of 1731 days was not condoned, therefore, the same was wrongly
permitted to be withdrawn with the liberty. In view of the above, the
Division Bench had dismissed the application for revival with liberty to get
the MCRC No. 3678/2021 restored. Hence, the present petition under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking restoration of MCRC No.
3678/2021.
5. In Cr.P.C., there is no such provision of reviewing or recalling of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:820
3 MCRC-30569-2024
any order, therefore, the MCRC No. 3678/2021 which was withdrawn by the
petitioner with the delay of 1731 days cannot be restored by reviewing the
order dated 31.10.2023. Even otherwise, the petitioner withdrew the CRA on
29.09.2018 and filed MCRC on 19.01.2021 but before that the judgment in
the case of Mallikarjun Kodagali (Supra) had already been passed in the year
2019, therefore, the petitioner wrongly filed an application under Section
378(4) seeking leave to file criminal appeal because that was not
maintainable, therefore, now the MCRC cannot be restored.
6. The respondent No.1 and 2 have preferred a Criminal Appeal No.
1174/2015 under Section 454 of Cr.P.C. seeking release of confiscation of
the ornaments. If so advised, the present petitioner may file an application
for her intervention in the said criminal appeal.
7. In view of the above, present MCRC is dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Vatan
