Wednesday, 20, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Satish Kumar vs . Rajinder Kumar
2026 Latest Caselaw 934 HP

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 934 HP
Judgement Date : 19 February, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Satish Kumar vs . Rajinder Kumar on 19 February, 2026

Satish Kumar vs. Rajinder Kumar

.

Cr.R No.106 of 2026

19.02.2026 Present: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate for the petitioner.

Cr.R No.106 of 2026

Notice be issued to the respondent, returnable by

of the next date of hearing, on taking steps during the course of

the day.

rt List on 19.03.2026.

Cr.MP No. 566 of 2026

Notice in the aforesaid terms.

By way of present application, the

applicant/petitioner has prayed for suspension of substantive

sentence imposed upon him vide judgment of conviction dated

23.08.2019 and order of sentence dated 26.08.2019, passed by

the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb,

District Una, H.P in CIS Registration No.14/2016, titled as

"Rajinder Kumar Vs. Satish Kumar", which was affirmed by

learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Una, District Una, H.P., in

Cr. Appeal No.64 of 2019 titled "Satish Kumar vs. Rajinder

Kumar" on 26.09.2025, under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act. The learned trial Court vide judgment of

conviction dated 23.08.2019 and order of sentence dated

26.08.2019, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of

Rs.4,00,000/- for the commission of an offence punishable

under Section 138 of the NI Act and in default of payment of

fine, he shall undergo further simple imprisonment for eight

.

months.

The respondent/non-applicant had filed a complaint

under Section 138 of NI Act, in the Court of learned Judicial

Magistrate, First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P on

27.01.2016. It was averred in the complaint that the present

of petitioner- applicant maintained good relations with the

respondent and asked him to pay Rs.3,00,000/- for the purpose rt of purchasing of tempo. In the month of June, 2013, the

respondent paid a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the petitioner and he

assured the respondent to return the aforesaid amount on or

before 01.09.2015. That the present petitioner-applicant issued

two cheques drawn on PNB, Daulatpur Chowk in discharge of

his legal liability and the same was dishonoured when

presented before the Bank with the remarks "Funds

Insufficient". Therefore, the complaint was filed before the

learned Judicial Magisrate, First Class, Court No.II, Una against

the present petitioner-applicant. The learned Judicial Magistrate

vide its judgment dated 23.08.2019 convicted the applicant and

ordered that the applicant shall undergo simple imprisonment

for a period of one year and pay a fine of Rs.4,00,000/-. The

said judgment was affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge-I, Una, District Una, H.P., in Cr. Appeal No.64 of 2019

titled "Satish Kumar vs. Rajinder Kumar" on 26.09.2025.

Perusal of the revision shows that the applicant has

raised arguable points and the disposal of the same shall take

some time. Conseqeuntly, during the pendency of the present

petition, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence as

passed by the learned trial Court on 23.08.2019 and

.

26.08.2019, which was affirmed by learned Additional Sessions

Judge-I, Una, District Una, H.P. on 26.09.2025, is ordered to be

suspended, during the pendency of the revision, subject to the

following conditions:

(i) That the applicant/petitioner shall furnish

of personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, along with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, within a rt period of four weeks from today, with an undertaking that he will surrender before the learned trial Court to serve the remainder

substantive sentence, in case of ultimate dismissal of the present revision, by this Court;

(ii) That the applicant/petitioner shall deposit 30% of the total amount of compensation, if not

deposited earlier, which has been referred to by the learned trial Court as fine, with the learned trial Court, within a period of eight weeks from

today, which shall be in addition to the amount, if not, already deposited by the applicant.

(iii) The applicant/petitioner shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of

the Court.

A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court,

with a direction that the report of compliance of this order be

submitted to this Court, on or before the next date of hearing.

List the matter on 19.03.2026.

( Romesh Verma ) Vacation Judge February 19, 2026 (Ritu)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter