Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Kalu@ Supari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 March, 2025

                                                               1                                 CRR-529-2025
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT INDORE
                                                        CRR No. 529 of 2025
                                         (KALU@ SUPARI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )



                           Dated : 03-03-2025
                                   Applicants by Shri Mohammad Imran Khan - Advocate.
                                   Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Arpan Jain - Public

Prosecutor appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

Heard on the question of admission.

The records of the Court below have been received.

Being arguable, the revision is admitted for final hearing. Also heard on IA No.1670 of 2025 , first application under Section 438 read with Section 442 (1) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 = Section 397 (2) / 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of applicant No.1 Kalu @ Supari S/o Rajjak Khan and applicant No.2 Chibu @ Imran S/o Gammu Khan.

Vide judgment and order dated 28.07.2023 passed in Criminal Case bearing number RCT/1858 of 2014 by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barnagar, District Ujjain (MP), applicant No.1 Kalu @ Supari S/o Rajak Khan stands convicted under Sections 6 / 9 of Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam, 2004; Section 11 (d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960; Section 39 / 192 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; Section 146 read with Section 196 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; Section 66 read with Section 196 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988;

2 CRR-529-2025 Section 56 read with Section 192 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Section 3 read with Section 181 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a terms of one year with fine of Rs.5,000/-; fifteen days RI with fine of Rs.300/-; only fine of Rs.2,000/-; only fine of Rs.1,000/-; only fine of Rs.2,000/-; only fine of Rs.2,000/-; and only fine of Rs.500/- respectively with default stipulations; whereas appellant No.2 - Chibu @ Imran S/o Gammu Khan stands convicted under Sections 6 / 9 of Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam, 2004 and Section 11 (d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a terms of one year with fine of Rs.5,000/- and fifteen days RI with fine of Rs.300/- respectively with usual default stipulations and this judgment / order of conviction and sentence has been affirmed by the learned appellate Court.

Learned counsel for the applicants, while taking exception to this impugned judgments, submits that 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 applicants have been awarded a short sentence of one year RI only. 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 applicants. 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAMESH CHANDRA PITHAWE Signing time: 03-03-2025 18:05:13 3 CRR-529-2025 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 applicants.

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 remaining custodial sentence of the applicants.

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 applicants be released on bail upon each of them furnishing a 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 21.04.2025 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.

4 CRR-529-2025 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].

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. Certified copy as per rules.

(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) JUDGE rcp Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAMESH CHANDRA PITHAWE Signing time: 03-03-2025 18:05:13