Madhya Pradesh High Court
Awadhlal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2017
CRR-222-2017
(AWADHLAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
08-02-2017
Shri Rahul Diwaker, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Y. D. Yadav, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.2030/2017, which is an application for condonation of delay in filing this revision.
As per the scrutiny report of the Registry, this revision suffers a delay of 12 (twelve) days.
Learned Panel Lawyer submits that he has no objection in condoning the said delay.
Taking into consideration no-objection made by the learned Panel Lawyer, the delay being minor and the term of jail sentence awarded to the applicant, I condone the delay by allowing the I.A. Also heard on admission.
After perusing the impugned judgment, the memo of revision and the records of both the courts below, I find this revision is arguable. Hence, it is admitted for final hearing.
Learned Panel Lawyer has accepted the notice of admission of this revision on behalf of the respondent/ State. Hence, no further notice is required to be sent to it.
Heard on I.A. No.1817/2017, which is the first application under Section 397(1) of the Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the applicant for suspension of post-conviction jail sentence and grant of bail to him during the pendency of this revision.
Vide the impugned judgment dated 14.10.2016 passed by the Sixth Additional Sessions Judge Link Court Khurai district Sagar in Criminal Appeal No.461/2012 titled Awadhlal Vs. State of M.P. through Police Station Khurai, the sole applicant stands convicted under Section 379 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to suffer RI for one year with a fine of 1000 (one thousand) rupees, with default clause. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant remained on bail during trial of the case and also pendency of the appeal. However, he has been undergoing the jail sentence since 14.10.2016, the date of the impugned judgment. He submits that the applicant had already deposited the fine amount as imposed. He submits that this revision is of the year 2017 and there is no likelihood of the same being listed for final hearing in recent future. He submits that looking to the short term of remaining jail sentence, this revision becomes infructuous in case the applicant would have suffered the same before this revision being decided on merits. He submits that the applicant has a good case on merits. Upon these submissions, he prays to allow the I.A. Learned Panel Lawyer opposes the prayer.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions raised on behalf of the parties by their counsel and the short term of jail sentence, but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the applicant. Therefore, the IA is allowed.
The execution of remaining jail sentence of applicant Awadhlal is hereby suspended and it is ordered that he shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of 30,000 (thirty thousand) rupees with one solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to depositing of fine amount, if any. On being released on bail, the applicant shall appear before the Registry of this Court to mark his presence first time on 29.8.2017 and thereafter on all such other dates as may be fixed by it in this regard until further orders of this Court.
List the case for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA MAHAJAN) JUDGE ps