Bombay High Court
Kirit R. Rambhia vs Monika Biken Lalan Through Her ... on 23 October, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1/4 [email protected]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.336 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3847 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.336 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3846 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.336 OF 2023
Kirit R. Rambhia .... Applicant
versus
Monika Biken Lalan & Anr. .... Respondents
.......
• Mr. Amol Joshi a/w Chetan Pawar, Advocate for Applicant.
• Mr. Jatin P. Karia (Shah) a/w Snehankita Munj a/w Shraddha
Kamble, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
• Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 23rd OCTOBER, 2023
P.C. :
1. The Applicant was the original accused in CC
No.0600594/SS/2019 before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 6 th
Court, Mazgaon (Sewri), Mumbai. The learned Magistrate vide
his judgment and order dated 18/02/2020 convicted the
Applicant for commission of offence punishable u/s 138 of the
Nesarikar
::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 25/10/2023 23:13:59 :::
2/4 [email protected]
Negotiable Instruments Act and he was sentenced to suffer
simple imprisonmen for three months. He was directed to pay a
fine of Rs.6 lakhs and in default to suffer simple imprisonment
for three months.
2. The prosecution case was that the complainant (the
Respondent No.1) advanced loan of Rs.5 lakhs to the Applicant.
In repayment of that loan, the Applicant issued three cheques
totalling to Rs.5 lakhs. Those cheques were dishonoured. They
were dated 12/11/2018, drawn on Punjab National Bank, M.G.
Road, Thane Branch. Therefore this prosecution was launched.
3. The Applicant challenged that order by way of Criminal
Appeal No.257 of 2020 before the Additional Sessions Judge,
Greater Mumbai. That Appeal was dismissed vide judgment and
order dated 17/06/2023 and therefore this Revision Application
is preferred by the Applicant.
4. Learned counsel Mr. Jatin P. Karia (Shah) appears for
the Respondent No.1 and waives service of notice on behalf of
::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 25/10/2023 23:13:59 :::
3/4 [email protected]
Respondent No.1. He submitted that the learned counsel for the
Applicant to be directed to serve a copy of the application on
him.
5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that it was
a purely money lending transaction and the complainant did not
have license for the same. Therefore there was no legally
enforceable liability. The evidence was led by the power of
attorney holder and therefore the evidence was not properly led.
On this count, the evidence is liable to be set aside. Apart from
merits of the case, he submitted that the Applicant is desirous of
settling the matter with the complainant.
6. Learned counsel for the Applicant further submitted
that the Applicant has already deposited 50% of the cheque
amount with the Appellate Court during pendency of the
Appeal. He further submitted that he has no objection if the
amount which is deposited before the Appellate Court, is
withdrawn by the Respondent No.1, on executing necessary
::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 25/10/2023 23:13:59 :::
4/4 [email protected]
undertaking, subject to outcome of the present Revision
Application.
7. Considering these submissions, since the Applicant has
shown his bonafide intention of exploring possibility of
settlement, till the next date, he can be protected by way of ad-
inteirm relief. Hence, the following order is passed :
ORDER
(i) Issue notice to the Respondent No.1 returnable
on 06/11/2023.
(ii) Learned counsel Mr. Jatin P. Karia (Shah) waives
service of notice on Respondent No.1.
(iii) By way of ad-interim relief, till the next date, the
substantive sentence imposed in the Applicant
shall stand suspended.
(iv) Stand over to 06/11/2023.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
