Suraj Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Suraj vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 01, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1038945

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1038945
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 01, 2013
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suraj

Advocate Shri. Sharad Verma

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

cr.a.no.1486 o”01. 02.13 shri sharad verma, counsel for the appellants. shri puneet shroti, pl for respondent/state. heard on ia no.1642/13 which is the forth repeat application on behalf of appellant no.2 for suspension of his remaining jail sentence and grant of bail. his earlier firs.application in this regard has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 25.11.09 while his subsequent second application was dismissed for want of prosecution but his third application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 13.8.2010 and thereafter this forth application has been preferred. appellant no.2 has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 392/34 of the ipc for ri 1.years with fine of rs.5000/-. his earlier application for suspension of the remaining jail sentence was dismissed on merits taking into consideration that he has also been involved in other three identical cases. subsequent to such earlier dismissal on merits, i have not found any material change in the circumstances except passing of some years.consequently, the ia is hereby dismissed but by extending the liberty to revive his prayer after exhausting the remedy to file the appropriate application for early hearing of this appeal and subject to outcome of such application. (u.c.maheshwari) judge mkl

Full Judgment

Cr.A.No.1486 o”

01. 02.13 Shri Sharad Verma, counsel for the appellants.

Shri Puneet Shroti, PL for respondent/State.

Heard on IA No.1642/13 which is the forth repeat application on behalf of appellant No.2 for suspension of his remaining jail sentence and grant of bail.

His earlier fiRs.application in this regard has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 25.11.09 while his subsequent second application was dismissed for want of prosecution but his third application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 13.8.2010 and thereafter this forth application has been preferred.

Appellant No.2 has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 392/34 of the IPC for RI 1.years with fine of Rs.5000/-.

His earlier application for suspension of the remaining jail sentence was dismissed on merits taking into consideration that he has also been involved in other three identical cases.

Subsequent to such earlier dismissal on merits, I have not found any material change in the circumstances except passing of some yeaRs.Consequently, the IA is hereby dismissed but by extending the liberty to revive his prayer after exhausting the remedy to file the appropriate application for early hearing of this appeal and subject to outcome of such application.

(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge MKL

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Suraj vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Criminal