Tilak Raj vs Pardeep Kumar

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tilak Raj vs Pardeep Kumar on 15 May, 2024

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:067983




S. No.127

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH
                   ****
                             CRM-M-24337 of 2024
                              Date of Decision:15.05.2024
Tilak Raj                   .....Petitioner
      Vs.
Pardeep Kumar               .....Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:-   Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate for the petitioner.

                         ****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral)

Petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, vide judgment dated 15.01.2024 and sentenced vide order dated dated 20.01.2024 in complaint case titled as "Pardeep Kumar Vs. Tilak Raj"

by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram. Against his conviction and sentence, petitioner filed appeal. The Appellate Court while suspending the sentence of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 17.02.2024 (Annexure P-3), directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount as awarded by the Trial Court till 02.05.2024. It is the aforesaid order, which has been challenged in this petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not provided any opportunity of hearing before passing the order. Petitioner is not in a position to pay any amount and there was exceptional circumstance due to which petitioner was not required to deposit 20% of the compensation amount.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2024 07:42:30 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:067983 CRM-M-24337 of 2024 -2-

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to "Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others", Crl. Appeal No.2741 of 2023, SLP (Crl.) No.(s) 4927 of 2023. Learned counsel contends that the Appellate Court was required to consider as to whether the case of the petitioner falls in the exception or not.

4. Without issuing any notice to the respondent, lest it may delay the proceedings, the present petition is accepted. The impugned order is set aside. The Appellate Court is directed to pass a fresh order in the light of the law explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari's case (supra).

5. Since this order has been passed in the absence of the respondent, therefore, the respondent will be at liberty to approach this Court, in case he is aggrieved by the order.

May 15, 2024                                                ( DEEPAK GUPTA )
renu                                                             JUDGE
           Whether Speaking/reasoned           Yes/No
           Whether Reportable                  Yes/No




                                      2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2024 07:42:31 :::