Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jitendra Patel vs Mishrilal on 1 February, 2022
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 445/2022
Jitendra Patel S/o Sh. Gopal Ram, Aged About 42 Years, B/c
Kumawat, R/o Bera Navoda Kheda, Maharajpura, Teh. Jaitaran,
Dist. Pali (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
Mishrilal S/o Sh. Binjaram, B/c Gurjar, R/o Jaitaran, Dist. Pali
(Raj.).
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain, Sr. Advocate assisted
by Mr. Parvin Vyas, through VC
For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.K. Bhati, P.P.
Mr. D.S. Udawat, through VC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Order
01/02/2022
This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated
12.01.2022 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Jaitaran, District Pali (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate
court') in Appeal No.4/2022, whereby the appellate court while
accepting the application preferred on behalf of the petitioner
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has ordered for releasing him on bail
subject to the condition of furnishing a personal bail bond to the
tune of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety of likewise amount.
The appellate court has further directed the petitioner to deposit
20% of the total amount of Rs.46,00,000/- in the trial court as per
Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-445/2022]
The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced by the
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaitaran, District Pali
(hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in
Criminal Case No.137/2014 vide judgment dated 15.12.2021.
The petitioner has preferred an appeal before the appellate
court which was admitted and record of the trial court was called
and the application preferred on behalf of the petitioner under
Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence came to be allowed
by the appellate court with the aforesaid conditions.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
condition imposed by the appellate court of depositing 20% of the
amount of Rs.46,00,000/- is onerous one and it is very difficult for
the petitioner to comply the same.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner is ready to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- in the trial court in
place of depositing 20% of the amount of Rs.46,00,000/-. It is
also submitted that the cheque amount is of Rs.27,00,000/- and
taking into consideration the said fact, the condition of the
appellate court of depositing 20% of the amount of
Rs.46,00,000/- is too harsh. It is, therefore, prayed that the
impugned order dated 12.01.2022 passed by the appellate court
may be modified suitably.
Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer
of the petitioner.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the fact that the amount of cheque involved in
dispute is Rs.27,00,000/-, I deem it appropriate to modify the
order dated 12.01.2022 passed by the appellate court and direct
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-445/2022]
the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in place of
20% of actual amount of Rs.46,00,000/- in the trial court within a
period of two months from today. The other conditions imposed
by the appellate court in the impugned order shall be remain
unchanged.
With these observations, the criminal misc. petition is
disposed of.
The stay petition is also disposed of.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
40-Babulal/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
