Stroyen Sukumar Joshua vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 11215 Bom

                                  1/3           21-REVN-353-23-@-IA-3949-23

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

              CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.353 OF 2023
                                 WITH
                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3949 OF 2023
                                   IN
              CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.353 OF 2023

    Stroyen Sukumar Joshua                            .... Applicant
               versus
    The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                   .... Respondents
                                 .......

    •       Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey a/w Anil Pandey a/w Shweta yadav
            i/b. SAVJ Law Solutions, Advocate for Applicant.
    •       Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the State/Respondent.

                                  CORAM   : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
                                  DATE    : 01st NOVEMBER, 2023

    P.C. :


    1.               The Applicant is convicted by the Metropolitan

         Magistrate, 14th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai, vide his Judgment and

         Order dated 05/10/2015 passed in C.C.No.1400653/SS/2010.

         The Applicant was convicted for commission of offence

         punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He was

         sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to

         pay a fine of Rs.1,32,388/-, in default to suffer simple

         imprisonment for 15 days. The Applicant has challenged that

         order before the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai,

Nesarikar




   ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2023               ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2023 23:31:40 :::
                                2/3              21-REVN-353-23-@-IA-3949-23

      vide Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2015. It was dismissed vide

      order dated 01/09/2023.


 2.               The prosecution was for dishonour of cheque for the

      amount of Rs.89,000/-. The transaction in question was for sale

      and purchase of the gold and diamond jewellery. Learned

      counsel for the Applicant submitted that the statutory demand

      notice makes a reference to the cheque bearing No.023055

      drawn on IDBI Bank, Powai for Rs.89,000/-. However, in the

      concluding paragraph No.9 of the notice, the amount demanded

      is Rs.6,35,000/-. Then this is not sufficient compliance with the

      statutory requirement before filing of the complaint.


 3.               Without prejudice to his submissions on merits he

      states that during pendency of his Appeal, he has deposited

      Rs.33,000/-. The Applicant is further willing to deposit

      Rs.33,000/- before the Trial Court to show his bonafides.


 4.               Considering these submissions, it is necessary to hear

      the other side i.e. the Respondent No.2, who is the original

      complainant.




::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2023                  ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2023 23:31:40 :::
                                      3/3                 21-REVN-353-23-@-IA-3949-23




 5.               Considering the statement made by learned counsel for

      depositing further amount of Rs.33,000/-, till the next date, the

      sentence can be suspended.



 6.               Hence, the following order :


                                           ORDER

(i) Issue notice to the Respondent No.2 returnable on 18/01/2024.

(ii) The Applicant is permitted to deposit Rs.33,000/- before the Trial Court, within a period of 4 weeks from today.

(iii) Till the next date before this Court i.e. till 18/01/2024, substantive sentence imposed on the Applicant shall stand suspended.

(iv) Stand over to 18/01/2024.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)