Unknown vs Mohd. Irfan
2026 Latest Caselaw 2150 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs Mohd. Irfan on 19 March, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

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

                                      CRLR No.44 of 2025
                                      Naresh Negi
                                                                                 --Revisionist
                                                            Versus
                                      Mohd. Irfan
                                                                                 --Respondent
                                      Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Anil Anthwal, learned counsel for revisionist.

2. Mr. Prem Kaushal, learned counsel for respondent.

3. Today, the matter is listed on recall application (IA/5/2026) and delay in filing the recall application (IA/4/2026), filed by the revisionist-applicant.

4. There is delay in filing the recall application. For the reasons indicated in affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application, delay is condoned. Delay condonation application (IA/4/2026) made therefor is allowed.

5. By means of the recall application (IA/5/2026), revisionist/applicant wants to recall the order dated 18.08.2025 passed by this Court, whereby, revisionist was directed to surrender before the learned Trial Court pursuant to judgment and order impugned to serve out the sentence.

6. Non-bailable warrant was issued against the revisionist. Revisionist instead of surrendering before the learned Trial Court moved this recall application.

7. Recall application cannot be allowed as the respondent-complainant is suffering since long when the cheque given by revisionist was bounced.

8. Respondent-Mohd. Irfan, who is present before this Court, made a statement that he had given an amount of Rs.4,10,000/- to revisionist after taking loan from the Bank. In return, revisionist has given him a cheque which was dishonoured by the Bank, resulting into filing the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

9. In such view of the matter, no good ground is made out to recall the order dated 18.08.2025 passed by this Court.

10. Accordingly, the recall application (IA/5/2026) is rejected.

11. Exemption application (IA/6/2026) stands disposed of.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 19.03.2026 PN