Bombay High Court
Madhav Gajkumar Upadhye vs Neminath Dada Sidnale on 12 September, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
21-REVN-189-2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 189 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO. 1487 OF 2022
Madhav Gajkumar Upadhye ...Applicant
Versus
Neminath Dada Sidnale & Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2974 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 189 OF 2022
Neminath Dada Sidnale ...Applicant
Versus
Madhav Gajkumar Upadhye ...Applicant
....
Mr. Paras Yadav, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Jayant Bardeskar, Advocate for Applicant in Interim Application No.
2974 of 2022.
Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent - State.
....
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 12th SEPTEMBER, 2022.
PER COURT:
1. The revision applicant is convicted for offence punishable
under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act vide judgment
and order dated 4th July, 2018 passed by learned J.M.F.C., 11th
Court at Kolhapur in Summary Criminal Case No.3121 of 2015 for
offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments
Digitally signed
by SAJAKALI
SAJAKALI LIYAKAT
LIYAKAT
JAMADAR
Date:
Sajakali Jamadar 1 of 4
JAMADAR 2022.09.13
19:08:57
+0530
21-REVN-189-2022.doc
Act and to deposit the amount of Rs.3,25,000/- towards
compensation and in default to suffer sentence of two months
simple imprisonment.
2. This order was challenged by the applicant before the
Sessions Court by preferring appeal. The said appeal was
dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 23 rd March,
2022 on the ground that the appellant and his Advocate were
absent. Sentence is not suspended. The appeal is dismissed for
default. Directions were issued to the trial Court to issue
conviction warrant against the accused. Interim Application
No.1487 of 2022 has been preferred for suspensions of sentence.
3. Vide order dated 9th May, 2022, this Court suspended the
sentence imposed by the trial Court subject to deposit of
Rs.75,000/- before the trial Court within a period of four weeks
and the applicant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing
P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one or more sureties in
the like amount.
4. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that, pursuant to
order dated 9th May, 2022 the applicant has deposited the amount
of Rs.75,000/- before the District Court.
Sajakali Jamadar 2 of 4
21-REVN-189-2022.doc
5. The respondent/complainant has preferred Interim
Application No. 2974 of 2022 for withdrawal of the amount of
Rs.75,000/- deposited by the revision applicant pursuant to order
passed by this Court.
6. Learned Advocate for the revision applicant has opposed the
prayer for withdrawal of amount as prayed by the complainant.
7. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the revision
application as well as Interim Applications can be disposed off.
ORDER
i. Order dated 23rd March, 2022 passed by the Sessions
Court dismissing Criminal Appeal No.132 of 2018 preferred by
the applicant is set aside.
ii. The said appeal is restored to file.
iii. The order dated 9th May, 2022 passed by this Court in
interim application No.1487 of 2022 suspending the sentence
of imprisonment imposed by the trial Court shall continue for
a period of four weeks.
iv. The applicant is permitted to prefer application for
suspension of sentence before the Sessions Court, where the
appeal is pending and pray for extension of relief of
suspension of sentence granted by this Court during pendency
of appeal. The Sessions Court shall take into consideration
the fact that the revision applicant had deposited the amount
of Rs.75,000/- within stipulated time in accordance with order
dated 9th May, 2022.
Sajakali Jamadar 3 of 4
21-REVN-189-2022.doc
v. The applicant/complainant in Interim Application
No.2974 of 2022 preferred by the original complainant for
withdrawal of the amount is allowed.
vi. The complainant is permitted to withdraw the amount
of Rs.75,000/- deposited by the revision applicant before the
District Court.
vii. The withdrawal shall be subject to the outcome of the
appeal preferred by the revision applicant before the Sessions
Court.
viii. The revision application as well as both interim
applications are disposed off accordingly.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Sajakali Jamadar 4 of 4
