Ramesh Paroha And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Avanindra Kumar Singh, J

Call for the record.

Heard on admission.

The revision is admitted for final hearing.

Also heard on I.A. No.91 of 2026, first application under Section 438 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant no.1-Ramesh Paroha, applicant no.2-Harprasad Tiwari, applicant no.3-Arun Kumar Tiwari, applicant no.4-Anil Kumar Tiwari, applicant no.5-Lalman Tiwari, applicant no.6-Chotelal Tiwari, applicant no.7-Arvind Tiwari, applicant no.8-Rajkumar Tiwari and applicant no.9-Shivendra Tiwari.

The applicants are is aggrieved of the judgment dated 30.12.2025 passed by the learned 11th Additional Session Judge, Satna, (M.P.) in CRA No.13/2021 whereby the appeal of the appellants therein has been dismissed arising out of the judgment dated 13.02.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, District Satna, M.P. in Criminal Case No.1501204 of 2008, whereby applicants have been convicted and sentenced as under :-

Name of accused

Conviction

Sentence

Section

Act

Imprisonment fine

Fine

Imprisonment in of Fine

Accused Arvind Tiwari

324 (two counts)

IPC

R.I. for one year

Rs.1000/-

Additional R.I. one month.

All accused

147

IPC

R.I. for three

months.

Rs.500/-

Additional R.I.

one month.

All accused except Rajkumar Tiwari

323/149 (two counts)

IPC

R.I. for three months under each head.

Rs.500/- under each head

Additional R.I. one month unde each head.

All accused except Arvind

Tiwari.

324/149 (two counts)

IPC

R.I. for 1 year under each head.

Rs.1000/-

under each head

Additional R.I. month.

All accused

326/149 (one counts)

IPC

R.I. for 3 years under each head.

Rs.3000/-

under each head

Additional R.I. f month under each

head.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that as 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 respondent- State on the other hand supports the impugned judgment and opposes the prayer for suspension of sentence.

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.91 of 2026 is allowed.

It is directed that subject of the fine amount in the trial court by the applicants and on their furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand Thousand only) each with a solvent surety each in the like amount 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.

It is made clear that deposit of fine amount shall be pre condition for grant of bail.

Applicants 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 case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

List the case for final hearing in due course.

C.C. as per rule.