Arman Chakraborty Alias Sunny ... vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 1249 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Arman Chakraborty Alias Sunny ... vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 6 June, 2025

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010110052025




                                                                undefined

                            THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
     (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                              Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./190/2025

           ARMAN CHAKRABORTY ALIAS SUNNY CHAKRABORTY
           PROPRIETOR OF M/S SUNNY ENTERPRISE S/O SHRI ASHISH
           CHAKRABORTY PROPRIETOR OF M/S SUNNY ENTERPRISE R/O AHUBARI
           TALAP PO TALAP PS DOOMDOOMA DIST TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN 786156



           VERSUS

           THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
           REP BY THE PP ASSAM

           2:M/S B D TRADING
            REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI ASHUTOSH KUMAR DUBEY S/O LT BACHA
           DUBEY R/O RUPAI SIDING PO TALAP PS DOOMDOOMA DIST TINSUKIA
           ASSAM PIN 78615

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY, MR. T DEURI,MRS. R S DEURI,U
BHARADWAJ,MS. L WANGSA

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                 BEFORE
              HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

                                           ORDER

06.06.2025

1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. K. N. Choudhury assisted by learned counsel Mr. T. Deuri for the petitioner Arman Chakraborty @Sunny Chakraborty Page No.# 2/3

who has filed this application under Section 442 read with Section 438 of the BNSS, 2023 challenging the judgment and order dated 03.03.2025 passed in connection with Criminal Appeal No. 39(4)/2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tinsukia dismissing the appeal and upholding the judgment and order dated 08.11.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tinsukia in connection with N.I. Case No. 257/2022 convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentencing him to pay a compensation of Rs. 17,50,000/- with default stipulation.

2. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. D. P. Goswami for the respondent No. 1. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and thus no formal notice is required to be issued.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that this is a fit case to be remanded back. There is not a iota of evidence that Rs. 35,00,000/- has been paid by the petitioner to the respondent No. 2.

4. The liability of the petitioner is to establish the preponderance of probability. It is submitted that the petitioner has returned the amount of Rs. 10,89,590/- and the remaining amount has been adjusted with the supply of green tea leaves by the petitioner to the Respondent No. 2.

5. It is further submitted that the Respondent No. 2 without submitting his income tax return has failed to prove that he has sufficient income to lend a huge amount of money to the petitioner.

6. It appears that the operation of the judgment and order impugned by the petitioner can be stayed. Thereby, the operation of the impugned judgment and order dated 03.03.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 39(4)/2024 and the impugned judgment and order dated 08.11.2024 in N.I. Case No. 257/2022 is stayed until Page No.# 3/3

further orders subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 20% of the fine amount before the learned Trial Court within 2 months from today.

7. Call for the Trial Court Records of the aforementioned cases from the respective Courts.

8. Issue notice to the respondent No. 2 as per usual process returnable within 4 (four) weeks.

9. List accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant