Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mukesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 January, 2025
1 CRR-163-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 163 of 2025
(MUKESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 30-01-2025
Applicant by Shri Ayush Agrawal - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Ajay Raj Gupta -
Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the revision is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on IA No.1279 of 2025 , first application under Section 438
read with Section 442(1) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 =
Section 397 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of
remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of applicant Mukesh S/o
Motesingh Bhilala.
Vide judgment dated 10.12.2021 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Kukshi, District Dhar (MP), the applicant stands convicted under
Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under
Section 146 /196 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and sentenced respectively to
undergo SI for six month with fine of Rs.500/-, RI for six month with fine of
Rs.500/-, RI for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/-, RI for two years with fine
of Rs.1,000/- and only fine of Rs.500/- with usual default stipulations 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-163-2025
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 suffer from
surmises and conjectures and have been passed ignoring serious infirmities
and anomalies. The applicant is in custody since 27.12.2024. The revision
being of the year 2025 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.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case 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 fine amount,
if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during 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
3 CRR-163-2025
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 10.03.2025
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
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.
4 CRR-163-2025
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
Let record of both the Courts below be requisitioned.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
