Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Kabra Brothers & Ors vs Ranisati Pharmaceuticals on 6 August, 2021
06.08.2021 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Item No.4 CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
Ct.No.34
dc.
C.R.R. 33 of 2019
(Via Video Conference)
Kabra Brothers & Ors.
versus
Ranisati Pharmaceuticals
In Re: An Application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Mr. Ayan Bhattacherjee ... For the Petitioners.
Mr. Dipanjan Dutt,
Mr. Karan Dudhwewala ... For the Opposite Party.
This revisional application has been preferred against
the judgment and order dated 28.11.2018 passed by learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge, 1st Fast Track Court,
Bichar Bhavan, Kolkata in connection with Criminal Revision
No. 02 of 2017 wherein the learned sessions court was
pleased to affirm the judgment and order of conviction and
sentence passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th
Court, Calcutta in connection with Case No. C/30478/2013
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The grievance of the petitioners relates to both the
findings arrived at by the learned Magistrate and the learned
sessions court as also the sentence imposed. The sentence so
passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and affirmed
by the learned sessions court is as follows :
The petitioners are directed to pay a sum of
Rs.26,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs) as
compensation to the complainant as per section 357(3) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure within five months from
the date of delivery of the said judgment, in default to
suffer simple imprisonment for six months.
I have considered the subject matter of the case which
relates to a loan amount of Rs.25,00,000/- out of which
Rs.50,000/- was paid by the petitioners to the opposite party
and thereafter, the petitioners issued a cheque being No.
813748 dated 01.06.2013 drawn on Canara Bank, Brabourne
Road Branch of Rs.24,50,000/- for discharge of the rest of
their liability in favour of the opposite party. The said cheque
was signed by one of the petitioners and the same, after being
presented, was dishonoured with the bank's endorsement
'funds insufficient' and the same was intimated to the
opposite party vide return memo dated 08.08.2013 which was
received by it on 10.08.2013. The complainant thereafter
through his lawyer issued a demand notice dated 17.08.2013,
which was sent by registered post with A/D at the correct
address available to the complainant. It is alleged that in
spite of receipt of the notice, the present petitioners, being the
accused, failed to make any amount.
I have perused the judgment so delivered by the
learned Metropolitan Magistrate which was based on evidence
adduced by the prosecution and also considered the defence
version. None of the documents relied upon by the
complainant is subjected to serious challenge so far as their
evidentiary value is concerned. The learned court, in fact,
imposed sentence after taking into account the overall
circumstances and the same is clear from the quantum so
imposed as compensation of Rs.26,00,000/-, although the
cheque, which was dishonoured, was for Rs.24,50,000/-. The
learned sessions court, while exercising its revisional
jurisdiction, took into account the relevant documentary
evidences which were marked as Exhibits as also the oral
evidence and the provisions of law applicable in such
circumstances. The learned revisional court after thorough
assessment of the magisterial order, was pleased to dismiss
the revisional application.
I do not find any illegality in the orders passed by the
learned Magistrate or the learned sessions court which
involve a question of law for interference by this Court.
Records of this revisional application reflect that a co-
ordinate Bench of this Court on 17.09.2019 was pleased to
direct the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to the
opposite party out of the sum of Rs.26,00,000/- so imposed
as compensation by the learned Magistrate.
The learned advocate for the opposite party submits
that pursuant to the said order of this Court, the opposite
party has already received the said sum of Rs.20,00,000/-
from the petitioners.
By an order dated 26.07.2021, this Court directed the
learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Calcutta to
execute the sentence to the extent of recovery of
Rs.6,00,000/- by invoking the appropriate provisions of Code
of Criminal Procedure.
Be that as it may, in view of the discussions made
above, so far as the merits of the revisional application are
concerned, I am of the view that as a second revisional court
until and unless some question of law is involved or there is a
manifest error in appreciation of the facts of the case, it
would not be fit and proper for interference. Accordingly, CRR
33 of 2019 is dismissed.
Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.
All pending applications, if any, are consequently
disposed of.
The learned Magistrate is directed to proceed with the
execution case as directed above.
Department is directed to send back the lower court
records to the jurisdictional Magistrate forthwith.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order
duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
