Smt. Lilly Panda @ Lily Panda vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1107 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Smt. Lilly Panda @ Lily Panda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 July, 2025

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                                                                     2025:JHHC:20383



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
           Cr. Revision No. 246 of 2023

Smt. Lilly Panda @ Lily Panda, W/o Shri Aditya Kumar Panda, R/o Brahman
Tola, Hesapara, P.O.-Hesapara, P.S. & District-Ramgarh
                                                 ..... ....  Petitioner
                               Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Ram Lal Sahu, S/o Rameshwar Sahu, R/o Babhanidih, P.O. & P.S.-Ramgarh,
   District-Ramgarh
                                                 ...     ....   Opp. Parties

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioner           : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate
For the State                : Mr. Nawin Kr. Sinha, APP
For the O.P. No. 2           : Mr. Abhishek Sharan, Advocate
                             ------

Order No. 09 / Dated : 24.07.2025.

1. The instant criminal revision is preferred against the judgment of conviction affirmed in appeal in Cr. Appeal No. 54 of 2012, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been convicted under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentence to pay a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the complainant/ O.P. No. 2 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for one year and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-.

2. Learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner has confined his argument on the point of sentence. It is submitted that petitioner was ready to settle the dispute with the O.P. No. 2 for which Rs.1,50,000/- has already been deposited in the office of the Registrar General, in compliance to the order dated 09.05.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by way of two demand drafts.

3. O.P. No. 2 did not show any interest to settle the dispute and has not moved this Court and despite appearance before this Court, has taken no step to receive the demand draft.

4. In view of the fact that about two years have been elapsed since the deposit of the demand draft, it needs to be re-validated. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the same and deposit the total compensation amount before the learned Trial Court within three months. Accordingly, Criminal Revision stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/ -