Sanjay Kumar Sahu @ Sanjay Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 10322 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sanjay Kumar Sahu @ Sanjay Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 11 November, 2024

Author: Rajesh Kumar

Bench: Rajesh Kumar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      Criminal Revision No.754 of 2024
                                    ----

Sanjay Kumar Sahu @ Sanjay Sahu, son of late Arvind Sahu, R/o Arvind Nagar, Nepal House, P.O. + P.S. - Doranda, Ranchi, Jharkhand.

                                                ....    ....     Petitioner(s)
                                  Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Arun Kumar Singh, son of Dev Prasad Singh, resident of MID/110, Harmu Housing Colony, PO-GPO, PS - Argora, Ranchi, Jharkhand.

                                                ....    ....     Opposite Party(s)
                                    ----
          CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
                                    ----
For the Petitioner(s)                    : Mr. Rahul Pandey, Adv.
                                           Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.
For the State                            : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P.
                                    ----
05/Dated: 11th November, 2024

1. The present interlocutory application has been filed for granting exemption from surrender in the main revision application.

2. The present criminal revision application has been filed against the judgment dated 11.06.2024 passed by learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2024 affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.03.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No.1757 of 2017 (T.R. No.88 of 2024) whereby the petitioner has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and also to pay fine of Rs.5,00,000/- by way of compensation for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and in case of default he is further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

3. It appears that the parties are friends and a friendly loan has been given to the revisionist.

4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that no contract has been formed and as such it is not legally recoverable dues.

5. In view of above fact, the ingredients of Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not present. Section 138 of the N.I. Act stipulates that there must be legally enforceable contract. Contract means there has to be a valuable consideration. In the present case, there is friendship between the parties and friendly loan has given, which is not legally obligated or regulated by the law, no consideration and as such there is no contract.

6. Considering the issue involved in the present revision application, the present interlocutory application stands allowed and the petitioner is exempted from surrender.

Criminal Revision No.754 of 2024

1. The present criminal revision is hereby admitted.

2. In the meantime, call for the Lower Court Records from the court concerned.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/-

Uploaded




Page | 2                                                              Criminal Revision No.754 of 2024