Dipak Chatterjee @ Dipak Chaterjee @ ... vs ) The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 4857 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Dipak Chatterjee @ Dipak Chaterjee @ ... vs ) The State Of Jharkhand on 3 May, 2024

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                Cr. Rev. No. 719 of 2021

                Dipak Chatterjee @ Dipak Chaterjee @ Deepak Chatterjee aged about
                75 years, son of Pran Kumar Chatterjee, resident of Samrat
                Apartment, West Jagtala, Maheshtala, PO Maheshtala, PS Maheshtala
                (M), District South 24 Parganas-700141 (West Bengal)
                                                          ...     ...     Petitioner
                                         Versus
                1) The State of Jharkhand
                2) Satish Kumar Agarwal, son of Bishwanath Agarwal, resident of
                Ratanjee Road, Purana Bazaar, PS Bank More, PO & District -
                Dhanbad - 826001 (Jharkhand) ...         ...      Opposite Parties
                                         ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Deomani, Advocate For the Opp. Party- State : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, APP

---

05/03.05.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

2. This criminal revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 20.07.2020 passed by learned District & Addl. Sessions Judge-VI-cum- Special Judge SC/ST, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No. 77 of 2019 whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court dismissed the appeal. The said appeal had been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.04.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No. 385 of 2017 (T.R. No. 1226 of 2019) whereby and whereunder the petitioner had been convicted under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months and pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- with default stipulation. The petitioner was also held liable to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000.00 to the complainant.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instructions in the matter and accordingly, he seeks permission to withdraw this criminal revision petition.

4. Permission is accorded.

5. This criminal revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

6. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.

7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned through 'FAX'.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Pankaj