Hari Ram Prajapati vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 392 Jhar

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                     Criminal Revision No. 520 of 2020
                                              ....

                Hari Ram Prajapati                                     ....    Petitioner
                                              Versus
                1. The State of Jharkhand
                2. Shree Bhagvan Ram                                   .... Opposite Parties
                                              ....
                CORAM:           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

                For the Petitioner               : Mr. A.K.Sahani, Adv.
                For the State                    : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Adv.
                For the O.P. No.2                : None
                                                 ....

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

....

09/10.02.2022 I.A. No.6573 of 2021 The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for suspension of sentence, during pendency of the instant criminal revision petition.

In spite of service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of the O.P. No.2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP. The instant criminal revision has been filed against the judgment dated 09.06.2020 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-V, Bokaro in Criminal Appeal No.86 of 2018, whereby while affirming the order of conviction under Sections 138 of the N.I. Act has modified the sentence from two years S.I. to Six months S.I. with direction to pay Rs.2,00,000/- with fine of Rs.20,000/- against the judgment and order of sentence dated 15.05.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with C.P. Case No.626 of 2011.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the allegation Rs.2,00,000/- (Two Lac) has been given as friendly loan for which a cheque has been given and that cheque, on presentation has been dishonored. The defense is that it is a misuse of cheque rather the revisionist has instructed the Bank not to honour the cheque. It has been further submitted that the loan in question is not a legally recoverable dues and as such the case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not maintainable.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the materials available on record and the fact that the petitioner has remained in custody for more than four months, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of this petitioner. Accordingly the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with C.P. Case No.626 of 2011.

I.A. No.6573 of 2021 stands disposed of.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Shahid/