@ Chandra Prakash Tulshiyan vs Sri Devendra Jha
2022 Latest Caselaw 3026 Cal

D/L1                               C.R.R. No.206 of 2014
May 20,

In Re: An application under Sections 397//401 read with 482 of the Code Bpg.

of Criminal Procedure, 1973;

Chandra Prakash Tulsiyan @ Chandra Prakash Tulshiyan Versus Sri Devendra Jha

Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Arijit Ganguly, Mrs. Sujata Das.

...for the State.

Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh.

...for the heirs of the complainant/opposite party.

Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the

petitioner submits an affidavit of compliance in respect of the order

dated 12th May, 2022 which encloses along with others the receipt

of a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- which was deposited before the learned

Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Howrah.

Let the affidavit of compliance be kept with the record.

Learned advocate for the heirs of the

complainant/opposite party is present in Court.

I have considered the subject matter of the case which

relates to a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act wherein the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court,

Howrah in Case No.531C of 2004 by his judgment dated 31st

January, 2008 was pleased to hold the present petitioner guilty of

the offence and imposed sentence of simple imprisonment for one

day and further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-

and in default directed for simple imprisonment for two months.

It is further reflected from the records that the subject

matter of the cheque which was dishonoured is Rs.50,000/-. Being

aggrieved the petitioner preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal

No.06/2008 before the learned Additional District & Sessions

Judge, 2nd Court, Howrah and by a judgment dated 23rd December,

2013 the appellate court was pleased to dismiss the appeal and

affirmed the order of conviction and sentenced passed by the

learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Howrah.

The affidavit of compliance reflects that a sum of

Rs.1,50,000/- has been deposited and there was an earlier direction

that the heirs of the complainant would be liberty to withdraw a

sum of Rs.1,40,000/- and the rest of Rs.10,000/- was directed to be

paid to the District Legal Services Authority.

In view of the compensation being substantially paid and

keeping in mind the purposes of the provision of Negotiable

Instruments Act, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose would

be served by sending the petitioner to jail at this stage.

Accordingly, the part of the order passed by the learned

Judicial Magistrate and affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge

which relates to imprisonment for one day is hereby quashed. The

proceedings at present is deemed to be disposed. As such, the

petitioner who was on interim bail may be discharged from the bail

bonds. As directed earlier by the order dated 18th May, 2022, the

heirs of the complainant would take steps before the learned

Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Howrah.

With the aforesaid observations, CRR 206 of 2014 is

disposed of.

Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of.

Interim order is hereby made absolute.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)