Lakhanlal vs Prem Narayan
2023 Latest Caselaw 19112 MP

                                                               1
                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT JABALPUR
                                                        CRR No. 3758 of 2023
                                                        (LAKHANLAL Vs PREM NARAYAN)

                          Dated : 09-11-2023
                                 Shri K. S. Rajput - Advocate for the applicant.

                                 Shri L. N. Sakle - Advocate for the respondent.

Heard on admission.

This revision being arguable is admitted for final hearing. Also Heard on I.A. No.19998/2023, which is first application filed

under section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

The applicant has been convicted by the appellate Court for an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine/compensation of Rs.8,10,000/-, with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the trial Court has n o t properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record. The maximum jail sentence awarded to the applicant is of one year. The

applicant is in custody and disposal of this revision will take considerable time, therefore, the jail sentence of the applicant may be suspended and he may be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the application. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the records and the judgments of the courts below.

This application for suspension of sentence has been argued on the ground that the respondent/complainant misused the cheques issued by the Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 11/9/2023 7:37:31 PM

applicant, although they were not issued under discharge of any legal obligation.

The application for suspension of sentence has been strongly opposed by the respondent/complainant.

The record reveals that besides issuing two cheques to the respondent/complainant, the applicant had entered into a property transaction and for this, he produced Exs.D1 and D2 in evidence. It can be mentioned here that no oral evidence was produced in defence. The judgments of courts below reveal that the applicant raised a plea that through these cheques, he refunded the sale amount which was paid by the respondent/complainant as the agreement regarding sale of property was cancelled. But even if this defence is

accepted, still then the applicant was liable to honour the cheques which were issued in discharge of liability to refund the sale amount.

The applicant has not challenged the fact of drawing the questioned cheques and his signatures thereon and the fact of their being dishonoured has also remained unchallenged.

The application is, therefore, dismissed. List the case for final hearing in due course.

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE ps

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 11/9/2023 7:37:31 PM