Dinesh Kumar Nirmalkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

For Petitioners : Mr. Manish Thakur, Advocate. For State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶17

09-02-2026

¶18

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief(s):-

¶19

Digitally signed byMOHAMMEDAADIL KHAN Date: 2026.02.1215:34:10 +0530

¶20

2

¶21

“10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and quash the impugned proceeding or to issue direction to learned Court of Special Railway Magistrate Raipur to stay the impugned proceeding of the criminal case No.3013/2009, till the final decision of the Law and legislation department State of Chhattisgarh and to grant extension of time for his appearance, in the interest of justice.

¶22

10.2 This Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶23

The subject mater in brief is that, the petitioner was an accused in Criminal Case No.3013/2009 which was decided on 15-03-2013 by the Special Railway Magistrate, Raipur and the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 3(A) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 and sentenced for R.I. for 1 year. The said judgment of conviction and sentence was challenged by him in Criminal Appeal No.97/2013 before the learned Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur which stands dismissed vide judgment dated 29-01-2014 and the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court was affirmed. The petitioner further assailed the said judgment passed by the learned appellate Court before the learned Single Bench of this Court in Criminal Revision No.98/2014. The said CRR was disposed of with the following

¶24

3

¶25

conditions:-

¶26

(i) Order of conviction is maintained;

¶27

(ii) in case, the revisionist deposits Rs.10,000/- as additional fine before the trial Court within six weeks from today, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a bond with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, and simultaneously he would apply before the appropriate government for commutation of his sentence;

¶28

(iii) The State Government shall be obliged to consider the request for commutation of sentence in accordance with law and in the light of observations made above, within a further period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order along with the request for commutation.

¶29

(iv) For a period of 06 months, revisionist need not surrender to undergo remaining sentence. If no orders for commutation in favour of revisionist is passed by the appropriate government, within the aforesaid period (3 months), the revisionist would be obliged to surrender only upon refund of fine deposited by him.

¶30

(v) The competent authority would strictly adhere to the time schedule and to the conditions stipulated hereinabove.

¶31

(vi) However, in case of default on the part of revisionist in complying with this order, he shall forthwith surrender after six weeks to serve out his remainder sentence.

¶32

4

¶33

The petitioner in compliance of the order dated 26-11-2024 passed in CRR No.98/2014 has deposited Rs.10,000/- before the learned trial Court on 27-12-2024 and made application of commutation of his sentence on 19-02-2025. The State authorities have not taken any decision on the commutation application of the petitioner and thus, in view of clause (iv) of para 8 of the order dated 26-11-2024 the petitioner is required to surrender. Since the State authorities have not decided the application for commutation of the sentence awarded to the petitioner, therefore, he filed the present writ petition claiming the aforesaid relief.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in compliance of the order dated 26-11-2024 passed in CRR No.98/2014 he already deposited Rs.10,000/- on 27-12-2024 before the learned trial Court and has made his representation on 19-02-2025 for commutation of the sentence. It is for the authority concerned to take a decision with respect to commutation of his sentence within a period of 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order dated 26-11-2024, but the authorities have not considered the same within time. The petitioner made his application under Right To Information Act for obtaining details of consideration on his application, but he has been sent to the State Govt. for obtaining the necessary information, but no decision could be taken on his representation. The petitioner has already complied with his part of the act, but it is the authorities concerned to take a decision within the stipulated time and therefore, the

¶35

5

¶36

authorities may be directed to take a decision immediately and till then the petitioner may be protected from surrender in compliance of the order dated 26-11-2024 passed in CRR No.98/2014.

¶37

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the representation of the petitioner for commutation of his sentence is under consideration before the authorities. Even if the authorities could not have taken a decision, the petitioner is required to comply with the order dated 26-11-2024 passed in CRR No.98/2014 by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, there is no merits in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶38

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the petition and gone through the pleadings.

¶39

From perusal of para 8 of the order dated 26-11-2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in CRR No.98/2014 it is quite vivid that the petitioner has to deposit Rs.10,000/- as additional fine before the learned trial Court within 6 weeks from the date of the order and simultaneously has to apply before the appropriate Government for commutation of his sentence. On such request of commutation of the sentence of the petitioner, the State Government was to consider the request for commutation of sentence within a further period of 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order dated 26-11-2024 and for the period of 6 months, the petitioner was not required to

¶40

6

¶41

surrender to undergo the remaining sentence and if the appropriate Government could not pass any order for commutation in favour of the petitioner within the stipulated period of 3 months, the petitioner was to surrender upon refund of the fine deposited by him. It also appears that in default of complying with the order the petitioner was to surrender after 6 weeks to serve the remaining sentence. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has deposited the amount of Rs.10,000/- on 27-12-2024 before the learned trial Court and has made his representation on 19-02-2025 for commutation of his sentence. As per the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the application for commutation has not been decided till date by the authorities which also reflected from the document annexed with the petition at page No.54 which is the memo dated 05-01-2026 issued byy the District Magistrate, Raipur.

¶42

Though, the petitioner has complied with the first part of para 8 of the order dated 26-11-2024, but the consequences have been described in clause (iv) of para 8 of the order dated 26-11-2024 and according to which if no order for commutation in favour of the petitioner is passed by the appropriate Government within the stipulated period of 3 months, the petitioner would be obliged to surrender only upon refund of fine deposited by him. The order dated 26-11-2024 passed in CRR No.98/2014 by the learned Single Judge does not appear to have been challenged in any higher forum and it attained its finality, even there is no

¶43

7

¶44

submission of the petitioner that he challenged the said order dated 26-11-2024 before any higher forum. In view of that, if the application for commutation of the sentence of the petitioner has not been considered with the stipulated time of 3 months by the appropriate Government, the petitioner is required to surrender to serve remaining sentence awarded by the learned trial Court. Therefore, we do not find any scope of interference in the present writ petition to extend the time stipulated in the order dated 26-11-2024 passed in CRR No.98/2014. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed .

¶45

Sd/Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶46

Aadil

Dinesh Kumar Nirmalkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar Nirmalkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Chaitali Das Vs B. K. Das

Amanraj Diwakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Beerdhan Dora

Murli Manohar Markam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Moti Lal Jain Vs Steel Authority of India

Kismatunnisha Vs State of Chhattisgarh