Jharkhand High Court
Lakhi Narayan Swarnkar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 8 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 1793 of 2018
....
Lakhi Narayan Swarnkar ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Pravin Kumar Lala ...... Opp. Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P.
For the O. P. No. 2: Mr. Ajay Kumar Trivedi, Advocate
Mr. Sujit Kumar Lala, Advocate
.....
I.A. No. 1134 of 2023
09/08.05.2023 The present Criminal Revision No. 1793 of 2018 has
been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment
dated 27.08.2018 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2018 by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad whereby learned
Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad has dismissed the
Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2018 and affirmed the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 22.12.2017 passed by Sri
Arpit Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in C. P. Case No.
302 of 2013 corresponding to T. R. No. 2777 of 2017 by which the
petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced to undergo S.I. for a
period of six (6) months and to pay total Rs. 5,75,000/- to the
complainant by way of compensation.
2. I.A. No. 1134 of 2023 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail to the petitioner, during pendency of the
Criminal Revision Application.
3 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that judgments and order passed by the learned Court below are
not sustainable in the eyes of law. It is submitted that there are
several contradiction in the evidences of the witnesses and
however, the learned Court below has convicted the petitioner for
the offence under Section 138 of the N. I. Act. It is further
submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 06.01.2023 and as
such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for
bail.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant-opposite party no. 2
has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the impugned
judgments and order passed by the learned Court below are fit and
proper and no interference is required by this Court. It is submitted
that the petitioner has taken Rs. 5,00,000/- from the complainant
as friendly loan, but he has not paid anything to the complainant
and as such, the learned Court below has rightly convicted the
petitioner and has awarded Rs. 5,75,000/- to as compensation the
complainant. It is submitted that if the petitioner is released from
jail, then nothing will be paid to the complainant-opposite party
no. 2. It is submitted that complainant and witnesses have fully
supported the case and it is a case of dishonor of cheque of Rs.
5,00,000/- and as such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be
rejected.
7. Perused the Records of this case and considered the
submission of both the sides.
8. It transpires that opposite party no. 2 is said to have given
a cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the petitioner on 28.12.2012, which
was dishonored due to insufficient fund.
It transpires that this is a case of friendly loan given by the
opposite party no. 2 to the petitioner, for which the opposite party
no. 2 had given a cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the petitioner.
9. It transpires that the petitioner has been convicted for the
offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and
has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for a period of six (6) months
and to pay Rs. 5,75,000/- to the complainant by way of
compensation.
10. It appears that the petitioner is in custody since
06.01.2023 i.e. for more than four months out of six month
sentence awarded by the learned Court below.
11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
during pendency of this Criminal Revision Application, the
petitioner namely Lakhi Narayan Swarnkar is directed to be
released on provisional bail for a period of four months, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Arpit
Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad or his Successor Court in
connection with C. P. Case No. 302 of 2013 corresponding to T. R.
No. 2777 of 2017 subject to the condition that one of the bailors
should be relative of the petitioner and one of the bailors must be
having landed properties in the district of Dhanbad and the
petitioner will submit his mobile number before the learned Court
below, which he will always keep active and will not change it,
during the pendency of this case, without prior permission of the
Court and the petitioner shall not leave Dhanbad District without
prior permission of the learned Court below.
12. Thus, I.A. No. 1134 of 2023 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
Cr. Rev. No. 1793 of 2018
13. Learned counsel for both the sides have submitted that the
petitioner and opposite party no. 2 may settle their dispute and as
such, the case may be referred for mediation before the learned
Secretary, DLSA, Dhanbad.
14. 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
22.05.2023. 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 a report to this Court on or before
04.07.2023.
15. Put up this case on 07.07.2023.
16. 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 and the learned Principal
District and Sessions Judge, Dhanbad for the needful.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
