Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dinesh vs Bhupendra Singh on 15 May, 2025
1 CRR-1983-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRR No. 1983 of 2025
(DINESH Vs BHUPENDRA SINGH )
Dated : 15-05-2025
Shri Akash Rathi - Advocate for the applicant.
Heard on I.A.No.6385/2025, which is an application under Section 5
of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.
Delay of 248 days in filing the revision is duly explained in the
application, which is well supported by an affidavit, therefore, application is
allowed for the reasons stated therein and delay in filing the revision is
hereby condoned.
Heard on the question of admission.
Being arguable, the revision is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.6058/2025, firsst application under Section
442(1) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of
remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the applicant Dinesh
S/o Rugnath Chauhan.
The applicant stands convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo 06 months' SI with
compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- with usual default stipulation 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
falsely implicated in this matter. Both the Courts below have not appreciated
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TEJPRAKASH
VYAS
Signing time: 5/15/2025
7:47:12 PM
2 CRR-1983-2025
the evidence in its right perspective. There are material contradictions and
omissions in the statement of the witnesses. Impugned judgments suffers
from surmises and conjectures and have been passed ignoring serious
infirmities and anomalies. Learned counsel further submitted that it is a case
of short sentence of 06 months and applicant is in jail since 21/04/2025. He
is ready to deposit the compensation amount. 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, looking to the evidence available in entirety and
the short sentence involved in the matter 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
compensation amount of Rs.1,58,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Eight
Thousand and Five Hundred Only) as awarded by the trial Court and
3 CRR-1983-2025
affirmed by the appellant Court, 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 of learned trial Court for compliance with following
conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on 23/06/2025
and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(2) 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].
4 CRR-1983-2025
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.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
Issue notice to the respondent on payment of process fee within seven
working days by RAD mode. Notice be made returnable within six weeks.
In the meantime, record of both the Courts below be requisitioned.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
Tej
