Punjab-Haryana High Court
Anish Khanna vs M/S Lap Homes Llp on 10 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049548
2024:PHHC:049548
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
113
CRR-713-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision.:10.04.2024
Anish Khanna .....Petitioner
Vs.
M/s Lap Homes LLP .....Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present: Mr. Ketan Antil, Advocate
for the petitioner.
****
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
CRM-15654-2024:
By way of this application moved under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., petitioner prays to
condone the delay of 1498 days in filing this revision petition.
2. Perusal of the paper-book would reveal that in a criminal
complaint filed in January, 2015 by respondent M/s Lap Homes LLP, the
petitioner Anish Khanna and his wife Rimple Khanna were convicted by the
Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram vide judgment
dated 04.08.2016 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Vide
a separate order dated 06.08.2016, petitioner Anish Khanna was sentenced
to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 06 months whereas his wife
Rimple Khanna was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049548
2024:PHHC:049548
CRR-713-2024 (O&M) -2-
of 03 months. Apart from this, petitioner was asked to pay compensation
amount of ₹17,00,000/-; whereas Rimple Khanna was asked to pay
compensation amount of ₹5,50,000/- to the complainant. A joint appeal
against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence was filed
by both of them before the Court of Sessions. Vide judgment dated
31.05.2018, Rimple Khanna was acquitted. However, vide judgment dated
30.11.2019, the appeal of the petitioner Anish Khanna was dismissed.
3. After dismissal of the aforesaid appeal on 30.11.2019, petitioner
has now approached this Court by filing this petition on 06.04.2024.
4. It is pleaded in the instant application that due to financial
constraints and family problems, petitioner could not file the revision
petition in time. In March, 2020, first wave of COVID-19 had started. Later,
petitioner was arrested in case FIR No.39 dated 31.03.2021 registered at
Police Station Women Police Station, Gurugram under Sections 323, 328,
354-C, 376(2)(n) & 506 of the IPC, in which he was released on bail on
30.06.2022. All the finances were used for getting him bailed out. He could
not even pay the installments of his residential accommodation due to which
his loan account was declared NPA on 31.03.2021 and the bank initiated
SARFAESI proceedings. Because of all these hardships and boycott from
the society, the petitioner and his family remained under a lot of mental
tension and all this has resulted in this delay.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner at length, this
Court does not find the grounds pleaded in the application to be justifiable
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:049548
2024:PHHC:049548
CRR-713-2024 (O&M) -3-
so as to condone the long delay of 1498 days in filing this petition. The
appeal had been dismissed by the Court of Session on 30.11.2019, when
there was no covid situation. It is not the contention of the petitioner that the
first wave of covid in March, 2020, prevented him from filing the petition.
As per him, in the criminal case registered against him, he was sent to the
judicial custody on 02.04.2021. Meaning thereby, that he was not in jail
prior to 02.04.2021. Besides, he was released on bail on 30.06.2022 and
thereafter also, nothing had prevented him from filing this petition. Simply
because he could not pay his loan amount due to which SARFAESI
proceedings were initiated by the bank, cannot be a reason to justify the
huge delay of 1498 days in filing this petition.
6. As such, the present application is dismissed.
7. Since the application to condone the delay is dismissed,
therefore, the main petition i.e. CRR-713-2024 is hereby dismissed being
barred by limitation.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
( DEEPAK GUPTA )
JUDGE
April 10, 2024
Neetika Tuteja
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
