Unknown vs Pankaj Chauhan" For The Offence
2025 Latest Caselaw 6010 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs Pankaj Chauhan" For The Offence on 10 December, 2025

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                              COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures

                               IA No.1 of 2025 (Bail Application)
                               In
                               CRLR No. 847 of 2025
                               Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the Revisionist.

2. Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3. The present criminal revision under Section 438/442 of BNSS is moved on behalf of the Revisionist to set-aside the impugned judgment and order dated 10.09.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Dwarahat, District Almora in Complaint Case No.01 of 2023, titled as "Smt. Kamla Devi vs. Pankaj Chauhan" for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, by which the Revisionist has been convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act sentencing to undergo one year simple imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.2,50,000/- and the judgment and order dated 20.11.2025 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Ranikhet, District Almora in Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2024, titled as "Pankaj Chauhan vs. State & Anr.", by which the appeal filed by the Revisionist against the judgment and order dated 10.09.2025 has been dismissed and the conviction awarded by trial court has been affirmed.

4. Heard.

5. Admit.

6. Objections, if any, to be filed by the Respondent by the next date fixed.

Heard on the Bail Application (IA No.01 of 2025)

7. Learned counsel for the Revisionist/Applicant submits that the Respondent no.2/complainant has failed to prove any enforceable debt against the Revisionist even then the learned court below has convicted the Revisionist; there is no independent witness before whom the alleged cheque was given by the Revisionist to the complainant and the alleged offence has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt against the Revisionist as such the court below have erred in convicting the Revisionist; the impugned orders passed by the courts below are wholly arbitrary, illegal and liable to be set-aside.

8. Learned counsel for the Revisionist/Applicant submits that the Revisionist was on bail during the pendency of the trial as well as during pendency of the appeal and he never misused the bail granted to him.

9. Learned State counsel vehemently opposed the bail application, however, admitted that the Revisionist/applicant was on bail during trial as well as during pendency of the appeal and he never misused the bail granted to him.

10. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties but without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Revisionist/applicant is admitted to bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

11. Bail Application stands allowed.

12. List this matter on 23.02.2026.

(Ashish Naithani, J.) 10.12.2025 Akash