Jharkhand High Court
Binay Kumar Tiwary @ Binay Kr. ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 735 of 2021
....
Binay Kumar Tiwary @ Binay Kr. Tiwary @ Binay Tiwary
...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Ramendra Kumar Rai ...... Opp. Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate
Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P.
For the O. P. No. 2 : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
......
I.A. (Cr.) No. 10456 of 2022
08/07.02.2023 The present Criminal Revision No. 735 of 2021 has been
filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 30.09.2021
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 05 of 2021 by the learned Sessions
Judge, Dhanbad whereby learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad has
dismissed the Criminal Appeal No. 05 of 2021 and affirmed the
judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.12.2020
passed by Shikha Agrawal, Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Dhanbad in connection with C. P. Case No. 992 of 2016 corresponding
to T. R. No. 443 of 2020 by which the petitioner has been convicted for
the offence under Section 138 of the N. I. Act and has been sentenced
to undergo S. I. for a period of eight (8) months and to pay a fine
amount of Rs. 6,55,000/- and out of the fine amount Rs. 6,50,000/- is
to be paid to the complaint and Rs. 5,000/- to be appropriated to the
State.
2. I.A. (Cr.) No. 10456 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail to the
petitioner, during pendency of the present Criminal Revision
Application.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for
the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
4. At the outset, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is ready to furnish the Demand Draft of
Rs. 1,00,000/- in the name of the informant at the time of furnishing
the bail bond and he is also ready to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- after certain
period. It is submitted that the petitioner is also ready to go for
mediation to settle the dispute. It is submitted that the petitioner is in
custody since 07.11.2023 and as such, he may be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2
has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is a case of
dishonour of cheque of Rs. 6,00,000/- and as such, prayer for bail of
the petitioner may be rejected.
7. Perused the Lower Court Records and considered the
submission of both the sides.
8. It appears that the petitioner is in custody since 07.11.2022
and is ready for settlement. It appears that the petitioner is ready to
furnish the Demand Draft of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the name of the
informant at the time of furnishing the bail bond and is also ready to
pay Rs. 1,00,000/- after certain period.
9. Considering the fact that the petitioner is ready to settle the
dispute and considering the period of custody of the petitioner and also
cconsidering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner-
Binay Kumar Tiwary @ Binay Kr. Tiwary @ Binay Tiwary is directed
to be released on provisional bail for four (4) months on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shikha Agrawal, Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad or Her Successor Court in
connection with C. P. Case No. 992 of 2016 corresponding to T. R.
No. 443 of 2020 subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be
own relative of the petitioner and subject to condition that the
petitioner will deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft in the
name of complainant -opposite party no. 2 at the time of furnishing his
bail bonds and the opposite party no. 2 will be at liberty to withdraw
the said Demand Draft of Rs. 1,00,000/- from learned Court below and
learned Court below shall release the Demand Draft of Rs. 1,00,000/-
on filing of necessary petition on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.
10. Thus, I.A. (Cr.) No. 10456 of 2022 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
Cr. Revision No. 735 of 2021
11. Learned counsel for both the sides have submitted that the
case may be referred for mediation before the Secretary, DLSA,
Dhanbad.
12. Under the circumstances, it will be desirable that both the
parties i.e. the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 may appear before the
learned Secretary, DLSA, Dhanbad on 23.02.2023. Thereafter, the
learned Secretary, DLSA, Dhanbad will appoint a
Mediator instantly to amicably settle the dispute between both the sides
and make an effort for reconciliation between both the sides also and
the learned Secretary, DLSA, Dhanbad shall submit his report to this
Court on or before 23.03.2023.
13. Put up this case on 28.03.2023.
14. Let a copy of this order be handed over to the learned counsel
for the petitioner and to learned counsel for the State and learned
counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and be also sent to learned
Secretary, DLSA, Dhanbad for the needful.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
