Santosh Kumar Dixit vs State Of U.P.
2016 Latest Caselaw 3455 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1747 of 2016
 

 
Revisionist :- Santosh Kumar Dixit
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Chandra Narayan Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 
Hon'ble Abhai Kumar, J.

This revision has been filed against the order dated 12.05.2016, passed by Additional District Session Judge, Court No. 14, Kanpur Nagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 186 of 2015 - (Santosh Kumar Dixit Vs. State of U.P. and another).

It has been stated by the learned counsel for the revisionist that complainant has not been made as party in this case and he is ready to make him party. He is permitted to make necessary amendment to array the complainant as party.

Necessary correction be made.

Sri Rajeev Kumar Sonkar, Advocate, filed today his Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, which is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that as per own admission of complainant, some money was received by him. In the statement as P.W. 1, it is accepted by the complainant that he gave Rs. 1,00,000/- in several installments, but no record of that is with him. It is also admitted by him that some money was also returned in installments, but he is not certain as to how much money was returned. It is submitted by the learned counsel that these facts was over-looked by the trial court as well as lower appellate court and judgements are based totally over-looking the material facts upon record.

Admit.

Summon the original lower court record (complaint case no. 967 of 2012) as well as lower appellate court record (criminal appeal no. 186 of 2015).

List immediately after receipt of both the records.

Considered the prayer for bail on behalf of revisionist-applicant.

It is submitted that appellant is cousin of complainant and they are in fiduciary relation and out of which cheque of Rs. one lac was given on the ground that when all the payments will be made then the original cheque will be returned to him.

In the circumstances let the revisionist ? appellant ? Santosh Kumar involved in Complaint Case No. 967 of 2012, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station - Sisamau, District ? Kanpur Nagar,, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned.

Fifty percent of the amount imposed as cheque amount as well as Rs.10,000/- as fine may be deposited before the trial court and the same may be released in favour of of the complainant / opposite party no. 2 ? Bhola Dixit. If any amount has already been deposited that will be adjusted against this order.

The amount will be deposited within one month, in case any default of payment, the order of bail will automatically be cancelled.

Order Date :- 09.06.2016.

Vinod.