Madhya Pradesh High Court
Alok Kumar Kashyap vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 July, 2025
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:34955
1 CRR-1558-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 29th OF JULY, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1558 of 2024
ALOK KUMAR KASHYAP AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Prateek Tiwari - Advocate for the applicants.
Shri Amit Garg - Panel Lawyer for respondent.
ORDER
This revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed assailing
the appeal judgement dated 14.3.2024, passed in Cr.A.No.04/2020 (Alok
Kumar Kashyap and another Vs. State of M.P.) by First Additional Sessions
Judge, Kotma, District Anuppur whereby, judgement of conviction and order
of sentence passed in Criminal Case No.736/2013 convicting the applicants
for commission of offence under Section 454 and 380 of IPC and sentencing
them to suffer RI for 02-02 years and fine of Rs.500/- for each offence with
default stipulation, has been affirmed.
2. On perusal of the memo of revision, it is apparent that
applicant/accused is absconding and despite his conviction from two Courts
he has not surrendered to serve the sentence imposed on him. Rule 48
Chapter X of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008 reads as under:
"48. A memorandum of appeal or revision petition
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:34955
2 CRR-1558-2024
against conviction, except in cases where the sentence
has been suspended by the Court below, shall contain a
declaration to the effect that the convicted person is in
custody or has surrendered after the conviction. Where
the sentence has been so suspended, the factum of such
suspension and its period shall be stated in the
memorandum of appeal or revision petition, as also in
the application under section 389 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.An application under section
389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall, as
far as possible, be in Format No. 11 and shall be
accompanied by an affidavit of the appellant/applicant
or some other person acquainted with the facts of the
case."
3. In the case in hand, applicant who is absconding has not filed any
application for exemption from surrender. Hon'ble Apex Court by order
dated 30.07.2024, passed in {[Special Leave (Criminal) Diary No.(s).20900
of 2024)] (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated
25.01.2024, in CRLR No.4402/2022 in the case of of Daulat Singh Vs. State
of Madhya Pradesh} has held that a revision is not maintainable where
accused has not surrendered despite his conviction to serve the sentence
imposed on him and exemption cannot be allowed by High Court. Hon'ble
Apex Court considered the judgement of Vivek Rai and Others Vs.
High Court of Jharkhand, reported in (2015) 12 SCC 86 and upheld the order
of this court and held as under:
"15. We do not, therefore, consider it appropriate to
accept as a sound proposition of law that a high court,
in exercise of its inherent power, may grant exemption
from surrendering in a particular case despite
concurrent findings of conviction oblivious of the duty
of giving effect to orders passed under the Code and/or
to prevent abuse of the process of a court."
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:34955
3 CRR-1558-2024
4. In the case in hand, applicant has failed to surrender before the
Court for undergoing the jail sentence and has not moved any application
before this Court for exemption from surrender. In such circumstances, this
revision application is filed in violation of Rule 48 of Chapter X of M.P.
High Court Rules. Hence, same is not maintainable.
5. Consequently, in view of the above, this revision being not
maintainable is dismissed.
6. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned through
Sessions Judge, Annupur.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
@shish
