CRLR/330/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 1423 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

CRLR/330/2025 on 31 July, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

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



                                  CRLR No.330 of 2025
                                  Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Vikas Anand and Ms. Gyanmati Kushwaha, Advocates for the revisionist.

2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, D.A.G. with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, B.H. for the State.

3. Mr. Vikas Kumar Guglani, Advocate for the respondent no.2/complainant.

4. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.06.2025 allowed the exemption application of the revisionist subject to the condition that the revisionist/applicant shall deposit ₹2,00,000/- within one week from today i.e., 05.06.2025 and to submit the bail bond with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, but the revisionist could not fulfill the condition which has been imposed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court, therefore, he surrendered and presently he is behind bars.

5. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.05.2025 passed by learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Appeal No.6 of 2024, Mukesh Kumar Vs. State and another, whereby appellate court has dismissed the criminal appeal and affirmed the judgment and order dated 14.12.2023, passed by learned Ist Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.1391 of 2014, Vishal Ahuja Vs. Mukesh Kumar, whereby he was convicted and sentenced under Section 138 of N.I. Act, 1881 and sentenced for a period of three months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of

₹2,00,000/- with default stipulation of 30 days simple imprisonment and further directed to pay ₹1,90,000/- to respondent no.2/complainant.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

7. Admit.

8. Sent for T.C.R. Bail Application (IA No.2 of 2025)

9. Learned counsel for the revisionist/applicant would press for the bail application.

10. It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionist/applicant that the revisionist/applicant has been sentenced three months simple imprisonment with a fine of ₹2,00,000/- with default stipulation of 30 days additional simple imprisonment.

11. It is further submitted by him that out of three months sentence the revisionist has already spent one and a half month's period under incarceration.

12. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent no.2/complainant submits that there is no merit in the revision and therefore instead of deciding the bail application, it should be heard finally.

13. Having considered the rival submission of the parties, this Court is of the view that since the revisionist/applicant has already spent one and a half month time out of three months imprisonment inflicted upon him, coupled with the fact that revisionist/applicant was on bail during trial and he has never misused the same, revisionist/applicant deserves to be released on bail.

14. Accordingly bail application is allowed.

15. Let the applicant - Mukesh Kumar be released on bail, during pendency of the present criminal revision, on his

executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

16. Realization of 50% of the fine, as imposed by the trial court, shall remain stayed, during pendency of the present criminal revision, adjusting the amount already paid by him. The sentence shall also remain suspended.

17. List this case on 30.10.2025.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 31.07.2025 SK