Madhya Pradesh High Court
Santosh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2025
1 CRR-1094-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 1094 of 2025
(SANTOSH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 01-05-2025
Applicant by Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Rahul Solanki -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Heard on IA No.3466 of 2025 , which is an application under Section 5
of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay.
Delay of 1004 days in filing the revision is duly explained in the
application, which is well supported by an affidavit filed on behalf of the
applicant, therefore, application is allowed for the reasons stated therein; and
delay in filing the revision is hereby condoned.
Also heard on IA No.3464 of 2025 , first application under Section 438
of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Suraksha Adhiniyam,2023 = Section 397 read
with Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereafter referred to
as the Code) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on
behalf to applicant - Santosh S/o Shri Devilal Ji Malviya .
The applicant stands convicted for offence under Sections 353 and 279
of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of one year with fine of Rs.400/- and three months rigorous
imprisonment with fine of Rs.200/-, under Section 3 read with Section 181
of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one
month with fine of Rs.100/- by judgment dated 03.12.2022 passed in
Criminal Case / RCT No.3674 of 2012 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Dewas, District Dewas (MP), which has been affirmed in Criminal Appeal
No.02 of 2022 by learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Dewas, District
2 CRR-1094-2025
Dewas (MP) vide judgment and order dated 16.02.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant while taking exception to this
impugned judgments submits that applicant is innocent and he has been
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 has been awarded a short sentence of one year
R I . He was under incarceration during trial for a period of 11 days (From
01.04.2014 to 03.04.2014 and 03.12.2019 to 10.12.2019) and thereafter from
17.02.2025 he is in custody. The applicant has suffered incarceration for
more than two months out of one year RI. 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 counsel 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
3 CRR-1094-2025
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 upon 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 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 18.06.2025
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. /
4 CRR-1094-2025
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.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
