[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jagyasen Basor vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 January, 2026
Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh
Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh
1 CRR-386-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRR No. 386 of 2026
(JAGYASEN BASOR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 30-01-2026
Shri Atish Yadav - Advocate for the applicants.
Shri Pankaj Raj - Panel Lawyer for the State of M.P.
Call for the record.
It is submitted learned counsel for the applicants that by mistake in
I.A. No.2185 of 2026 an application under Section 397 (1) of Cr.P.C. for
suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail he has mentioned
wrong fact that the applicants are in jail from 6.1.2025. Infact the applicants
are in jail from 9.1.2026 when the appeal was rejected by the learned Ist
A.S.J. in Cr.A. No.07 of 2023.
He further submits that the Vakalatanama of the applicants has been
received from the jail on 13.1.2026.
Heard on admission.
The revision is admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No.2185 of 2026 an application under Section 397
(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail
filed on behalf of applicant no.1- Jagyasen Basor and applicant no.2-
Seetaram Basor.
The applicants are aggrieved of the judgment dated 9.01.2026 passed
by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Deosar, Singrauli, (M.P.) in
CRA No.07/2023 arising out of the judgment dated 24th January 2023
passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Deosar, District Singrauli, M.P. in R.C.T.
No.202152 of 2012, whereby each applicant has been convicted and
sentenced to undergo R.I. one year with fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 9,
2 CRR-386-2026
R/w Section 51 of Wild Life Protection Act 1972 with default stipulation of
30 days S.I.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are in
jail and if they are not released on bail, then the purpose of filing this
revision would become futile. Therefore, it is prayed that execution of jail
sentence of the applicants be suspended and they be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supports the impugned
judgment and prayed to reject the application for grant of bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
After perusal of the record and hearing the arguments and the fact that
final hearing of this revision may take time, without expressing any opinion
on merits of the case, I deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence
of the applicants.
Accordingly, I.A. No.2185 of 2026 is allowed.
It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with a solvent surety in the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance
before the Trial Court on the dates as may be fixed by the Trial Court, the
execution of remaining part of jail sentence imposed upon applicants shall
remain suspended and they shall be released on bail till final disposal of the
revision.
Applicant shall follow the conditions of Section 438 (3) for suspension
of sentence as under:-
(a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of
the bond executed under this Chapter;
(b) that such person shall not commit an offence similar to the offence
of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
suspected; and,
(c) that such person shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the
3 CRR-386-2026
case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer or tamper with the evidence.
List after the record is received.
C.C. as per rule.
(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
bks
