Madhya Pradesh High Court
Tayyab vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 March, 2025
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1 CRR-683-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 683 of 2025
(TAYYAB Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 20-03-2025
Shri Ashish Gupta advocate for the revision petitioner.
Shri Amit Raval public prosecutor for State.
Heard on admission.
Record of the Courts below has been received.
Revision being arguable, is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A. No. 2184/2025, which is the first application under Section
438 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail moved on behalf of revision petitioner - Tayyab.
This criminal revision under Section 438 read with Section 442 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 29.1.2025 passed by Ist Additional
Sessions Judge, Mahidpur District Ujjain (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No. 49/2024,
confirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.12.2024
passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahidpur District Ujjain (M.P.) in RCT
No. 500472/2017 whereby revisioner petitioner has been convicted under Section
25(1-B)(b) of Arms Act and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment with
default stipulation.
Learned Counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the seizure
witnesses Manoj Prajapat (PW-1) and Prakashchandra (PW-2) did not support the
prosecution. Learned trial court committed error in convicting the revision
petitioner merely on the basis of inconsistencies in evidence of police officials.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUNESHWAR
DATT
Signing time: 20-03-2025
19:06:01
2 CRR-683-2025
Further, learned Appellate Court did not properly consider the contentions raised
in the appeal. Revision petitioner was extended benefit of bail during trial and he
did not misuse the liberty granted to him. He further contends that the
petitioner remained in judicial custody for 02 days during trial and he has
surrendered before the trial Court on 10.2.2025. 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 -Tayyab 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
23.6.2025 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-683-2025
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. 2184/2025 stands allowed and disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
BDJ
