Allowed

Rangnath Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2026CRLR/531/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court released the revisionist on bail while hearing his criminal revision against conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court considered that the revisionist had already served a significant portion of the imprisonment and paid more than half of the fine awarded.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties; remaining half of fine stayed.

Rangnath Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 531 of 2025

Rangnath Verma

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Maneesh Pandey, Anil Kumar Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Kumar Singh, Harpreet Mo.Jeeshan Ali Ahmad	Tiwari, Ashwini Singh,
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Amitesh Pratap Singh, Kumar Singh, Neetu Bhardwa Ram Yadav	Naveen j, Shesh

¶8

Court No. - 27

¶9

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

¶10

(Order on Bail Application)

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 and perused the record.

¶12

The instant criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 03.08.2023 in Complaint Case No.79886 of 2021 "Dheeraj Sharma versus Rangnath Verma", under Section 138 NI Act, Police Station Aliganj, District Lucknow, passed by learned Additional Court No.5, Lucknow as well as order dated 29.04.2025, passed in Criminal Appeal No.239 of 2023, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Lucknow, whereby convicting the revisionist under Section 138 NI Act, sentence of 1 year and pay Rs.8,00,000/- as fine and directed the revisionist to pay the said amount to the complainant and simple imprisonment has been awarded to the revisionist and failing to pay the said amount of fine the revisionist shall serve with additional simple imprisonment of 3 months.

¶13

Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the appellant has been convicted of a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to one year simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.8,00,000/- fine has been awarded out of which Rs.60,000/- is to be paid to the complainant as compensation. He next submitted that the revisionist has deposited Rs.1,60,000/- at the appellate stage and on

¶14

CRLR No. 531 of 2025

¶15

¶16

27.05.2025, he deposited Rs.2,50,000/- towards the fine awarded in the impugned judgment. Thus, he has deposited a total sum of Rs.4,10,000/till date, which is more than half of the amount awarded as fine in the impugned judgment and order.

¶17

He next submitted that the appellant has been held in jail custody since 29.04.2025 i.e. for more than 8 months. Thus, he has undergone twothirds of the imprisonment awarded in the impugned judgment and order. He also submitted that Rs.1,60,000/- deposited by the appellant at the appellate stage has not been received by the complainant and it remains deposited in the treasury.

¶18

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist.

¶19

Let the revisionist, Rangnath Verma, convicted and sentenced in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, during pendency of the revision.

¶20

The remaining half of amount awarded as fine stands stayed, during the pendency of the revision.

¶21

(Order on Appeal)

¶22

List on 26.02.2026 for hearing.

¶23

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

¶24

January 8, 2026 Mohd. Sharif

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rangnath Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rangnath Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

U.P. Pollution Control Board, Lucknow Thru. Member Secretary vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 6 Others

Utsav Singh @ Lucky Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sharath Chandrasekhar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Prabhu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Gyanchand vs Union of India Thru. Intelligee Officer N.C.B. Lucknow

Satish Chandra Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another