Madan Gopal Raha v. Sunil Kumar Basu
Case brief
What is this about?
In a 17-year-old revision under CrPC against a one-month sentence for cheque dishonour, the Court held that in the interest of justice and considering the petitioner's age (84) and the opposite party's non-contest, it modified the order directing an additional Rs. 50,000 deposit in lieu of imprisonment, relying on P. Ramadas v. State of Kerala.
What did the court decide?
Directing the petitioner to deposit an additional sum of Rs. 50,000/- within one month as an alternative to the one-month imprisonment, allowing the opposite party to withdraw the deposits.
What the court decided
224 30.08.2022 Ct.21 AKG
CRR 1165 of 2005 With IA No. CRAN/1/2022
In Re: - An application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
And
In the matter of: Madan Gopal Raha
…. Petitioner
Mr. Malay Bhattacharyya
…for the Petitioner
Despite service, opposite party no.1 is not represented.
This revisional application is preferred against a judgment and order dated February 22, 2005, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Bankura in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2004, affirming the judgment and order dated July 20, 2004, passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bishnupur in Case No. 39-C of 1994 convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentencing him to suffer simple imprisonment for one month and also to pay Rs. 1 lakh as compensation to the opposite party no.1.
It has to be noted that pursuant to the order dated July 5, 2022, passed by this Court, the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 1 lakh as compensation amount before the learned Magistrate in the Court below.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a revisional application under Section 482 CrPC pending for over 17 years involving a cheque dishonour case of an elderly petitioner required modification of the sentence to ensure the interes
Does the non-contest by the opposite party allow the court to settle the compensation amount compromise in a revisional petition regarding Section 138 NI Act?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Madan Gopal Raha
- respondent
Opposite party no. 1
Coram
Kausik Chanda
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Calcutta HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRR/1165/2005
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court