Patna High Court
Radhe Shyam SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The criminal revision is dismissed because the petitioners failed to surrender and no exemption from surrender can be granted under the applicable rules.
Summary
The petitioners were convicted under several sections of the IPC and sentenced to simple imprisonment. Their criminal appeal was dismissed with an order to surrender within 30 days, which they ignored and instead filed a criminal revision under Sections 438 and 442 of the B.N.S.S, 2023. The High Court had earlier directed them to file a surrender certificate within eight weeks under Rule 57A of the Patna High Court Rules, but they failed to comply. The petitioners also sought exemption from surrender and bail, arguing they were not in custody. The Court held that Rule 57A does not permit exemption from surrender and, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Daulat Singh, the revision could not be entertained without a surrender certificate. Consequently, the revision was dismissed and a non‑bailable warrant was ordered against the petitioners.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal revision can be entertained without the filing of a surrender certificate under Rule 57A of the Patna High Court Rules.
- Whether the court can grant exemption from surrender to convicts filing a revision.
- Whether bail can be granted in a revision when the petitioners are absconding.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 438, 442
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 341, 354, 379, 504
Subjects
- criminal revision
- surrender certificate
- Rule 57A
- non‑bailable warrant
- IPC offences
- bail
- absconding
- appellate procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.58 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2014 Thana- DARIGAON District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Radhe Shyam Singh Son of Late Vishwanath Singh Resident of Village -
Siguhi, P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas
2. Raj Vansh Singh Son of Late Vishwanath Singh Resident of Village - Siguhi,
P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas
3. Manti Kumar @ Angad Kumar Son of Saheb Singh Resident of Village -
Siguhi, P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas
4. Vijay Singh @ Vinay Singh @ Vinay Kumar Son of Raj Vansh Singh
Resident of Village - Siguhi, P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas
5. Amrendra Kumar Son of Siyaram Singh Resident of Village - Siguhi, P.S. -
Darigaon, District - Rohtas
6. Bhanu Pratap Singh @ Bhanu Pratap Kumar Singh Son of Raj Vansh Singh
Resident of Village - Siguhi, P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas
7. Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Singh @ Pawan Kumar Son of Saheb Singh
Resident of Village - Siguhi, P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Govind Singh S/O Shiv Singh R/O Village- Singuhi, P.S- Darigaon, Distt.-
Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Shree Niwas Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali, APP
Mr.Ashutosh Tripathy, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
11 12-03-2026 1.Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filling of
this criminal revision, in brief are that the petitioners are
accused and they have faced trial arising out of Sasaram P.S.
Case No.394 of 2014 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 324,
325, 504, 379, 354 of the IPC.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
2/9
2. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Rohtas,
Sasaram by the judgment and order dated 19.08.2019 passed in
G.R. Case No.840 of 2014 (Trial No.164/19/C.I.S. No.-
833/2014) convicted and sentenced the petitioners, which are as
under:-
(a)-01 year simple imprisonment for the offence under Section
147 of the IPC,
(b)-06 month simple imprisonment for the offence under
Section 323/149 of the IPC,
(c)-02 Years’ simple imprisonment for the offence under Section
325/149 of the IPC with a fine of Rs.2000/- to each petitioners,
in default of payment of fine, additional simple imprisonment
for two months,
(d)-02 months simple imprisonment for the offence under
Sections 341/149 of the IPC with further direction that all the
aforesaid sentences shall run concurrently.
3. Being aggrieved by the above judgment and order dated
19.08.2019, petitioners have preferred Criminal Appeal
No.59/2019 before the Court of District and Additional Sessions
Judge-X, Rohatas, Sasaram which came to be dismissed vide
judgment and order dated12.11.2024 confirming the judgment
and order dated 19.08.2019 of the learned Magistrate (trial
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
3/9
Court) with a direction to the petitioners to surrender within 30
days.
4. Petitioners did not surrender after dismissal of their Criminal
Appeal and preferred this Criminal Revision under Section 438
read with Section 442 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 against the above
judgment and order dated 19.08.2019 passed by learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Rohtas, Sasaram as
well as against the judgment and order dated 12.11.2024 passed
by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-x, Rohatas,
Sasaram.
5. The Office (reporting section) of this Court while reporting
this Criminal Revision has pointed out several defects. Out of
which one of the defect was that petitioners have not filed
surrender certificate.
6. The petitioners have removed all the defects except the defect
of filing surrender certificate and they moved supplementary
affidavit seeking exemption from filing the surrender certificate.
Later-on with the permission of the Court, the said
supplementary affidavit was converted into Interlocutory
Application No.1/2025.
7. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court after hearing Mr. Vishal
Saurabh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ahmad Ali,
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
4/9
learned APP for the State and Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy, learned
counsel for the O.P. No.2 at length, rejected the said
Interlocutory Application of the petitioners vide detail order
dated 06.01.2026. The relevant part of the order dated
06.01.2026 is quoted as under:
“I.A. No.01 of 2025
1…..
2……
3……
4……
5……
6……
7……
8……
9……
10……
11……
12. In the present case, this Court is faced with
similar predicament. The provision of Rule 57A of
the Rules of the High Court at Patna is quite
explicit. The aforesaid Rule provides for filing of
the surrender certificate if a convict has already
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
5/9
surrendered or to seek leave to surrender within
the specified period by filing an application. On
sufficient cause being shown, the Court may grant
such time and on such condition as it thinks fit and
proper. But the Rule does not provide for grant of
exemption from surrender to a convict, who has
approached this Court as revisionist. Only liberty
which has been granted to a convict that if he has
not surrendered at the time of filing of the revision
petition, he may moved an application seeking
leave to surrender within specified period. This
liberty cannot be extended to grant of exemption
from surrender till disposal of the revision petition.
13. Therefore, in the light of the specific provision
in the Rules of the High Court at Patna and the
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Daulat Singh (supra), this Court cannot accede
to the prayer of the revisionists/petitioners to grant
them exemption from surrender and by a corollary
exemption from filing surrender certificate till
disposal of the revision petition, as it would be
against the specific provision of law. The revision
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
6/9
petition of the petitioners cannot be admitted
unless they surrender before the court concerned
and brings on record the surrender certificate in
terms of Rule 57A of the Rules of the High Court at
Patna, 1916. Hence, the authorities cited by the
petitioners are of no help to their cause.
14. Accordingly, finding no merit, I.A.No.1 of 2025
is dismissed.
Cr. Rev. No. 58 of 2025
15. The learned counsel for the petitioners is
directed to bring on record surrender certificate
within eight weeks, failing which this petition will
be dismissed.
16.List the matter on 10.03.2026.”
8. Today, on the matter being taken up, Mr. Vishal Saurabh,
learned counsel for the petitioners submits that initially this
Criminal Revision was filed through Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad
on 07.01.2025. Thereafter he had filed his vakalatnama in this
case on 25.03.2025 in the Office. Order dated 06.01.2026 was
passed after hearing him as well as counsel for the State and the
informant. The said order was communicated by him to the
petitioners but thereafter they did not give any response to him.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
7/9
On asking them to comply the order dated 06.01.2026, they
have taken no objection certificate from him and engaged
another counsel Mr. Shree Niwas Singh, who had filed his
vakalatnama on 11.03.2026, hence, as on date, he has no
instruction to appear in the matter, therefore, his name may be
deleted from the cause-list.
9. In view of the above this Court heard Mr. Shree Niwas Singh,
newly engaged learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P.
for the State and Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy, learned counsel for the
O.P. No.2.
10. Mr.Ahmad Ali, learned APP for the State and Mr. Ashutosh
Tripathy, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 raised a preliminary
objection that since the instant Criminal Revision has been
preferred by the petitioners against their conviction, without
surrender certificate and despite having knowledge of order
dated 06.01.2026 of this Court, they deliberately did not
surrender and changing their counsel time to time with ulterior
motive, therefore matter cannot be heard on merit unless the
petitioners file surrender certificate.
11. On putting query about the compliance of order dated
06.01.2026 of this Court, Mr. Shree Niwas Singh, learned newly
engaged counsel for the petitioner apprised the Court that
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
8/9
petitioners have not surrendered even after the order dated
06.01.2026. He submits that since he has filed his vakalatnama
on 11.03.2026, therefore further time may be granted to the
petitioners for surrender.
12. Having heard the submissions of learned counsels for the
parties as noted above and perusing the record, I find that the
Appellate Court while rejecting the Criminal Appeal of the
petitioners vide order dated 12.11.2024 had directed the
petitioners to surrender within 30 days but they have not
complied the said order and without surrendering filed the
instant Criminal Revision. Not only this but even after dismissal
of petitioner’s I.A. No.1/2025 vide above order dated
06.01.2026 and granting eight week’s time to them to file
surrender certificate, they have not surrendered till date, as such,
the intention of petitioners are very much clear that they are not
inclined to obey the order of this Court dated 06.01.2026. I also
find that one of the prayer of the petitioners is to release them
on bail during pendency of this Criminal Revision. Since it is
admitted position that the petitioners are not in jail and they are
absconding, therefore there is no question for order of releasing
them on bail. It is also not in dispute that in the order dated
06.01.2026, there is clear direction to the petitioners to bring on
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.58 of 2025(11) dt.12-03-2026
9/9
record surrender certificate within eight weeks, failing which,
this petition will be dismissed. This Court finds that petitioners
are absconding since 13.12.2024 and despite giving liberty of
surrender within eight weeks’ by this Court vide order dated
06.01.2026, they did not surrender, hence this Court is of the
view that petitioners can not be allowed to misuse the liberty
and process of law. On non compliance of above order dated
06.01.2026, this Court has no option except to dismiss this
Criminal Revision.
13-Accordingly, this Criminal Revision is dismissed.
14-Trial Court is directed to issue non-bailable warrant against
the petitioners to ensure the compliance of order dated
12.11.2024 passed by District and Additional Sessions Judge-X,
Rohatas, Sasaram in Criminal Appeal No.59/2019.
15-Copy of this order be communicated to the trial Court
concerned immediately.
16-It is made clear that this order will not come in the way, if
the petitioners file fresh Criminal Revision after their surrender.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J)
pallavi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.