Allowed

Shri Sameer S/O Mahendrabhai Shah v. Dhansukhlal S/O Shivji Patel

Bombay HC9 Jan 2023REVN/258/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

After settlement of compromise terms and payment of dues with extension of time, High Court permitted withdrawal of deposit, set aside conviction and sentence, and acquitted applicant under Section 138 NI Act.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw deposit; order of conviction and sentence set aside; applicant acquitted under Section 138 NI Act.

Shri Sameer S/O Mahendrabhai Shah Vs Dhansukhlal S/O Shivji… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

revn258.19.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 258 OF 20 19

¶5

Shri Sameer s/o Mahendrabhai Shah Aged about 45 years, Occ: Business, Proprietor of New Tech Veeneers, M/223, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi.

¶6

...APPLICANT

¶7

---VERSUS---

¶8

Dhansukhlal s/o Shvji Patel Aged 52 years, Occ: Business, Resident of Lakadganj, Nagpur Proprietor of M/s Girnar Timbers Plot No.643, Chikli Layout, Kalamna road, Nagpur-440008.

¶9

...NON-APPLICANT

¶10

Shri A.R. Prasad, Advocate for applicant. Shri K.B. Dave, Advocate for non-applicant.

¶11

CORAM : G.A. SANAP, J. DATE : JANUARY 09, 2023.

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶13

. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned advocate for the non-applicant. Perused the record and proceedings.

¶14

The applicant has filed compromise pursis dated 16.12.2021. The parties, as per this pursis, have prayed for compounding of the offence. It is seen that after filing of this pursis

¶15

2 revn258.19.odt

¶16

the applicant could not deposit the amount within time and therefore the applicant filed an application for extension of time. The non-applicant has filed reply to the said application and opposed the application and contended that terms of the compromise were not acted upon by the applicant.

¶17

Learned advocates for the parties submit that now amount of ₹8,50,000/- has been paid, as per the settlement. Learned advocate for the non-applicant submits that out of this amount sum of 2,12,500/- was deposited in the trial Court by the₹ applicant. Learned advocate further submits that non-applicant may be allowed to withdraw the same.

¶18

Since parties have settled the matter, the permission for withdraw the said amount is granted. It is further made clear that if the amount is deposited in a fixed deposit, as per the order of the Court, then interest accrued on the same amount, if any, be paid to the non-applicant.

¶19

The settlement terms are confirmed by the learned advocates for the parties. The parties have acted upon settlement terms. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Additional

¶20

3 revn258.19.odt

¶21

Sessions Judge dated 29.07.2019 in Criminal Appeal No.258/2015 is set aside.

¶22

The applicant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. He was further sentenced to pay compensation of 8,50,000/- and in default, to suffer rigorous₹ imprisonment for further two months. The order of conviction and sentence is set aside.

¶23

The applicant–Sameer s/o Mahendrabhai Shah is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶24

The application stands disposed of.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Wagh

Shri Sameer S/O Mahendrabhai Shah v. Dhansukhlal S/O Shivji Patel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Sameer S/O Mahendrabhai Shah v. Dhansukhlal S/O Shivji Patel

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

Similar cases

Moreshwar S/O Sambhaji Udise Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Ballarpur Tq.Ballarpur Dist.Chandrapur

M/S Shrid Metals Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Thr.Its MD Shriyash Shashikant Kulkarni Vs M/S Sanvijay Rolling and Engineering Ltd. Thr. Its Authorisd Person Shri. Yatin Babulal Mehta

Prashant S/O Bindaprasad Dixit Vs Shalini W/O Prashant Dixit and Another

Dharmendra S/O Puranraoji Jadhav Vs Pravina W/O Dharmendra Jadhav (Maiden Name Ku. Pravina D/O. Rajkumarji Tagde) and Another.

Rajnish S/O Ayodhyaprasad Singh Vs Anq Enterprises Thr. Its Partner Mr. Haris Miyaz Ali

Motiram Vikram Rathod vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Collector, Yavatmal and Others