Surendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2025

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

Surendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 January, 2025

Author: Dipankar Datta

Bench: Dipankar Datta

                                     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.           2025
                (Arising out of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (Crl.) No.16241/2024)




                         SURENDRA SINGH                                         APPELLANT


                                                    VERSUS


                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH                           RESPONDENT




                                                   ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant in CRA No.1500/2014, on the file of the High

Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore 1, is also the appellant

before us. He is aggrieved because his criminal appeal is not being

listed for consideration, despite the fact that he has suffered

incarceration for more than 10 years. Such incarceration is owing to

conviction recorded, inter alia, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 against the appellant for which he is serving a term of life

Signature Not Verified
in prison.

Digitally signed by

rashmi dhyani pant
Date: 2025.01.22
16:50:58 IST
Reason:

1 High Court

1

3. By the notice issuing order dated 29 th November, 2024, this

Court had observed that pendency of the special leave petition would

not stand in the way of the roster bench of the High Court to hear the

criminal appeal, on priority, having regard to the long incarceration of

the appellant.

4. Office report dated 20th January, 2025 reveals that the said

order dated 29th November, 2024 has duly been communicated to

the Registrar General of the High Court for compliance.

5. Mr. Shikhil Shiv Suri, learned senior counsel appearing for the

appellant, complains that despite such order, the appeal was not

listed with the result that the appellant is languishing in the

correctional home without any prospect of his criminal appeal being

considered at an early date.

6. We have heard Mr. Shikhil Shiv Suri, as well Mr. V.V.V.M.B.

Pattabiram, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the

respondent-State of Madhya Pradesh.

7. Right to appeal is a statutory right conferred by the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973. Having regard to the immense burden on

the Judges of the High Court hearing criminal appeals, it might not

have been possible for the roster bench to take up the criminal

appeal for decision, despite the observation made by this Court in

the notice issuing order. At the same time, any early decision on the

appeal filed by the appellant does not seem to be imminent. Should

relief claimed be not granted and the appellant made to suffer

2
incarceration further, justice could turn out to be illusory for him in

the event the High Court, at any time in the future, were to reverse

the conviction and set aside the same together with the sentence.

8. Having regard to the long incarceration of the appellant, we

deem it fit and proper, in exercise of power conferred by Article 142

of the Constitution, to suspend the sentence and grant bail to the

appellant.

9. The appellant shall be released on bail, pending decision on

the criminal appeal, subject to such terms and conditions as may be

fixed by the trial court.

10. The impugned order directing the appeal to be listed in due

course is modified to the extent that the roster bench of the High

Court may list the criminal appeal at an early date for decision,

subject to its convenience.

11. Needless to observe, the appellant shall diligently participate

in the proceedings of the criminal appeal. Should the appellant’s

counsel remain absent without justifiable cause when the appeal is

taken up for hearing or his counsel, despite being present, expresses

inability to argue, the High Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail

of the appellant.

12. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant

of bail are not be treated as findings on the merits of the case.

13. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of on the aforesaid terms.

3

14. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

………………………..J.
(DIPANKAR DATTA)

……………………….J.
(MANMOHAN)

New Delhi;

January 21st, 2025.

4

ITEM NO.9                      COURT NO.15                      SECTION II-A

                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F              I N D I A
                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s)      for    Special     Leave     to   Appeal     (Crl.)    No(s).
16241/2024

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-
2024 in IA No. 8668/2024 in CRA No.1500 of 2024 passed by the
High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore]

SURENDRA SINGH Petitioner

VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent
IA No. 269219/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

Date : 21-01-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shikhil Shiv Suri, Sr. Adv.

Mrs. Madhu Suri, Adv.

Ms. Jyoti Suri, Adv.

Ms. Ishita Ahuja, Adv.

Mr. Vibhor Choudhary, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Jha, Adv.

Mr. Deva Vrat Anand, Adv.

Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR

For Respondent(s) Mr. V.V.V.M.B. Pattabiram, D.A.G.
Mr. Sarthak Raizada, Adv.

Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR
Mr. Gautam Singh, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant shall be released on bail on terms and conditions

to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

3. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.

5

4. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

(RASHMI DHYANI PANT) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA)
ASTT. REGISTRAR CUM PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
[SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE]

6