Allowed

Dalit Kumar Kurre v. Motiram Bandhe and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC17 Aug 2017CRMP/1128/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh condoned a delay of 297 days in filing a Cr.M.P. for leave to appeal against an acquittal. The court held the applicant made a bonafide mistake in filing a revision instead of an acquittal appeal before the Sessions Judge, validly condoned the delay, and directed the registry to register the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal filed after 297 days of delay is granted; case registered as acquittal appeal to be listed within two weeks.

Dalit Kumar Kurre Vs Motiram Bandhe and Ors. — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶2

Order Sheet

¶3

Cr.M.P. No.1128 of 2016

¶4

Dalit Kumar Kurre Vs. Motiram Bandhe & Anr.

¶5

17/08/2017
Smt. Indira Tripathi, counsel for the applicant.
Shri P.K. Tulsiyan, counsel for respondent No.1.
Shri Sangarsh Pandey, Dy.G.A. for the State.
Heard on application for condonation of delay.
Perused the order of Cr.M.P. No.577/2016. It appears that initially
complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act was
dismissed for want of prosecution on 10/09/2015. Against that revision
was filed by the applicant. Revision was allowed by 2^ndAdditional
Sessions Judge, Bastar Jagdalpur bearing Criminal Revision
No.32/2015. Said order was subject of challenge in Cr.M.P. No.577/2016
wherein this High Court has held that dismissal of complaint having
effect of acquittal, acquittal appeal should have been preferred. High
court in para 7 of the order has observed that the right of the
respondent/complainant stands reserved for preferring a proper regular
appeal against the order passed by the Magistrate dismissing the
complaint for want of prosecution on 10/09/2015. Hence, this Cr.M.P. has
been preffered with a prayer to leave to appeal. Considering the fact it
appears that were was bonafide mistake occurred in preferring revision
before the 2^ndAdditional Sessions Judge and eventually High Court by
its order dated 29/07/2016 has given liberty and reserved power to the
applicant herein to proceed to file the acquittal appeal, Thereafter,
acquittal appeal has been preferred after delay of 297 days.
Considering the reasons and the facts of this case, I am inclined
to condone the delay in filing the Cr.M.P. Consequently, delay in filing the
Cr.M.P. of 297 days having been explained properly is condoned.
Heard on application for leave to appeal.
On due consideration, taking into fact that for non-appearance

¶6

complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable dismissed, Cr.M.P. is allowed.	Instrument Act was
Registry is directed to register the case as a	cquittal apeal.
List the case for further hearing after two w	eeks.
	Sd/-
	(Goutam Bhaduri)
gouri	JUDGE

Dalit Kumar Kurre v. Motiram Bandhe and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dalit Kumar Kurre v. Motiram Bandhe and Ors.

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

Salim Ali @ Kallu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganiram Patle Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shri Ram Kumhar Vs State

Saraswati Bai Vs Vidyabhushan

Om Prakash @ Ghasiya Vs State Of Chhattisgarh