KAMAL DEV Vs. RAVINDER KUMAR
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
ANOOP CHITKARA,J. -
(2.)I have gone through the contents of the application and I am satisfied that delay of 243 days in filing the
revision is bonafide. As such, application is allowed and the delay in
filing the revision, is condoned. The application stands disposed of.
Revision be registered.
2. Challenging the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2015 dated 1.6.2019, whereby the first Appellate Court had affirmed the judgment of conviction passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur, H.P. in complaint No. 40-1-2010 dated 22.6.2015, under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the N.I. Act ), the petitioner has come up in this Court for invoking the revisionary jurisdiction under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(3.)The facts of the case apposite to decide the present petition are that the accused issued a cheque in favour of complainant
having No.128323 dated 2.2.2010 for Rs.2,50,000/- drawn on State
Bank of Patiala, Hamirpur from his Bank Account No.55126072033 in
lieu of debt taken by him from the complainant. Complainant
presented this cheque for encashment. Cheque however got
dishonoured due to insufficient funds in the account of accused
person. The complainant issued the requisite notice to make up the
deficiency of funds, but despite that the petitioner did not make the
payment. Accordingly, the aforesaid complaint was filed by the
complainant. The Trial Court convicted the accused under Section 138
of the N.I. Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for
one year and ordered to pay compensation amount of Rs. 3,20,000/-
under Section 357 (3) of Cr.P.C.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.