Chattisgarh High Court
Moh. Ramzan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 28 February, 2025
1/3
PAWAN
KUMAR
JHA
Digitally
signed by
PAWAN
KUMAR JHA
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 276 of 2025
• Moh. Ramzan S/o Moh. Zahur Aged About 30 Years R/o Sunder Nagar Camp 1
Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Durg Dist Durg (C.G)
2. Khurshid Aalam S/o Akhtar Hussain Aged About 33 Years Ramnagar, Supela
Bhilai Dist. Durg (C.G)
... Respondents
Order on Board
28.02.2025 Mr. Akash Kumar Kundu, Advocate for applicant.
Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer for Resp. No. 1/ State.
Heard on admission.
Revision is admitted for hearing.
Call for the records of court below.
Issue notice to respondent No. 2 on payment of process fee as per
rules. Notice be made returnable within four weeks.
Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, application under Section 438(1) of
BNSS, 2023 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
This revision has been preferred against the judgment of conviction
dated 19.02.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 162/2023 by the
Learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District - Durg,
Chhattisgarh whereby, the learned Appellate Court dismissed the appeal
by upholding the judgment of conviction passed by Judicial Magistrate,
First Class, Durg.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant in the present
case has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument
Act, 1881 and sentenced to 6 months R.I. with fine of Rs. 8,50,000/- and 3
months imprisonment in default of fine. He contended that 20% of the fine
amount ie., Rs. 1,70,000/- has already been deposited by the applicant as
per the order passed by appellate court during pendency of appeal. He
contended that the maximum jail sentence awarded to applicant is of 06
months R.I. Applicant is having prima facie good case in his favour. He
was on bail during trial and never misused the liberty granted to him.
Therefore, the substantive jail sentence awarded to applicant be
suspended and he may be enlarged on bail. He further submits that the
fine amount may also be suspended during pendency of this revision.
On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposes the
submission made by learned counsel for the applicant.
On considering the submission of the learned counsel for the
applicant, nature of dispute as also considering the maximum jail
sentence awarded to the applicant which is for a period of 06 months, and
further considering that the revision may likely to take sometime for its
hearing, I am inclined to allow this application and suspend the
substantive jail sentence of the applicant.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed. It is ordered that applicant
upon depositing 30% more of the total fine amount imposed upon him (ie.
₹ 8,50,000/-) before the trial court, the substantive jail sentence imposed
upon the applicant shall remain suspended, and the remaining portion of
the fine amount shall also remain suspended during pendency of this
revision and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond in sum of ₹ 10,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the
satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court on 19th March, 2025. Thereafter, he shall appear
before the concerned Trial Court on all subsequent dates given by the
concerned Court and shall continue to appear there till final disposal of
this revision.
Certified copy as per rules.
List this case accordingly.
Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judge
/pwn
