Laxmi Narayan Tak vs Mohd. Umar (Golden Press) ...

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Laxmi Narayan Tak vs Mohd. Umar (Golden Press) ... on 31 May, 2024

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2024:RJ-JD:25213]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3043/2024

Laxmi Narayan Tak S/o Shri Fhusa Ram, Aged About 75 Years,
R/o Ji Ri Haveli, Near Gulab Sagar Baccha, Jodhpur (Raj)
(Accused)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
Mohd. Umar (Golden Press) S/o Shri Usman Khan, R/o Mohalla
Laykan, At Present Nai Sadak, Jodhpur (Raj.) (Complainant)
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Petitioner Party (Present-in-Person)
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order 31/05/2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the order dated 06.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.100/2024.

2. Bereft of elaborate details, briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner was tried and convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act vide judgment dated 07.03.2024 passed by the learned trial Court. Aggrieved of the judgment of conviction, he preferred an appeal before the appellate forum and an application under Section 389 CrPC for suspension of sentence passed by the court below also came to be filed.

3. Vide the order under assail dated 06.04.2024, the learned court below has allowed the application under Section 389 of the CrPC with the condition of depositing 20% of the fine amount as (Downloaded on 03/06/2024 at 08:42:36 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:25213] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3043/2024] directed by the learned trial court. The grief of the petitioner would be that in view of the mandate of law and the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. reported (2023) 10 SCC 446, there is no need to direct the appellant to deposit 20% of the fine amount, instead thereof, 20% of the cheque amount may be directed to be deposited.

4. In view of the limited prayer, the legal provisions and the law enunciated in this regard by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I deem it appropriate to make a slight modification in the order dated 06.04.2024.

5. Accordingly, the instant criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed in part and the order dated 06.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3 Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.100/2024 is modified in the manner that now the petitioner would deposit 20% of the cheque amount related to the trial instead of 20% of the fine amount as directed by the trial court. The stay petition is also disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 55-divya/-

(Downloaded on 03/06/2024 at 08:42:36 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)