1 2026:CGHC:8812 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 498 of 2026 Gudi @ Arjun S/o Dashrath Prajapati Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Bharrapara Pendra, P.S. Pendra, District Gourela-Pendra-Marvahi Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Pendra, District Gourela-Pendra-Marvahi Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.02.2026 1. This petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed seeking modification/extension of time for depositing the fine amount of Rs. 5,000/-, as directed by this Court vide order dated 15.10.2024 passed in CR.R. No. 525/2014. 2. This Court, vide order dated 15.10.2024, while partly allowing the criminal revision and sentencing the petitioner to the period already KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 undergone, enhanced the fine amount from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under Section 354 of the IPC, in addition to the amount awarded by the trial Court and granted one month’s time from the date of the order to deposit the enhanced fine amount. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court had issued an arrest warrant against the petitioner, pursuant to which he was arrested on 05.02.2026. It is contended that only after his arrest did the petitioner come to know about the aforesaid order passed by this Court and realized that a grave mistake had occurred. It is submitted that had the petitioner been aware of the said order, he would have complied with the same. The petitioner is stated to be a responsible citizen, however, due to inadvertence and lack of proper communication on the part of his local counsel, the relevant facts and directions were neither informed nor conveyed to him. Thus, the default is stated to be bona fide and unintentional and the petitioner is presently in judicial custody on account thereof. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order dated 15.10.2024 passed by this Court with due consideration. 6. From perusal of the record, it is evident that at the time of passing of the order dated 15.10.2024, the petitioner was duly represented by her counsel, Ms. Najmi Begum, Advocate. The order was passed in her presence after hearing the parties. Therefore, it cannot be accepted that the petitioner had no knowledge of the said order. Once a party is represented through counsel, knowledge of the order is deemed to be 3 imputed to the party concerned. The subsequent engagement of another counsel cannot be a ground to plead ignorance of the order passed by this Court. 7. This Court, in its order dated 15.10.2024, had categorically stipulated that in the event of failure to deposit the enhanced fine amount within the stipulated period, the petitioner shall undergo the sentence as directed by the learned appellate Court. The condition was clear, unambiguous and self-executory in nature. The grounds urged in the present petition, attributing the default to lack of communication by the local counsel, do not constitute sufÏcient cause to recall or modify a concluded order, particularly when the petitioner was duly represented at the relevant time. 8. Moreover, the present petition is also barred under Section 403 of the BNSS (corresponding Section 362 of the Cr.P.C.), which prohibits alteration or review of a final judgment or order once signed, except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors. The relief sought by the petitioner would amount to modification of a final order, which is impermissible in view of the statutory bar contained therein. 9. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court finds no merit in the present petition. Accordingly, the present Cr.M.P. stands dismissed. 10. The Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the concerned trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal