Santosh Kumar Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2024)

Santosh Kumar Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law; office to return certified copies of the concerned courts' judgments on replacement by true/photocopies; pending interlocutory application, if any, closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal revision filed by the complainant against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned appellate court in the Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 matter is maintainable.

Court's answer

The present revision petition is not maintainable, in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Joseph Stephen and Others v. Santhanasamy and others (Live Law (SC) 83) and this Court's judgment in Cr. Revision No. 661 of 2022 (Ajay Paul @ Ajay Pal v. State of Jharkhand, decided on 23.02.2024).

Key takeaways

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.obiter¶19
On the petitioner's approach, the office is directed to return the certified copies of the judgments passed by the concerned courts upon their replacement by true/photocopies.obiter¶20
Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Cr. Revision No. 29 of 2019 (High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) — Criminal revision by the complainant against the judgment of acquittal dated 26th September 2018 passed by the appellate Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No. 1519 of 2004 / T.R. No. 280 of 2018 (Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881), in which opposite party no. 2 had been convicted — Held: the revision is not maintainable in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Joseph Stephen and Others v. Santhanasamy and others (Live Law (SC) 83) and this Court's judgment in Cr. Revision No. 661 of 2022 (Ajay Paul @ Ajay Pal v. State of Jharkhand, decided on 23.02.2024) — Revision dismissed; liberty reserved to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law; office to return certified copies on replacement by true/photocopies; pending interlocutory application closed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Revision No. 29 of 2019

Santosh Kumar Choudhary, aged about 41 years, son of Shiv Kumar Choudhary, Proprietor of New Kanak Medical Agency, UG 18 resident of Shree Shyam Bhawan Complex, Bank More, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. Bank More, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand). … … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand.

Gopal Kumar Agarwal, son of Ram Awtar Agarwal, resident of Chiragora, A.K. Sahay, Campur, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad.

… … Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opp. No. 2 : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate ---

10/18^th April 2024

1. This revision has been filed against judgment of acquittal passed by learned appellate court in connection with offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881.

2. Learned counsel for the opposite party state , Mr. Pankaj Kumar as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 Ms. Anita are present and both have submitted that the present revision is not maintainable.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that criminal revision is not maintainable in view of order passed in Cr. Revision No. 661 of 2022.

4. The petitioner is the complainant in C.P. Case No. 1519 of 2004 corresponding to T.R. No. 280 of 2018 instituted for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 in which opposite party no.2 was convicted and the judgement of acquittal has been passed by the appellate Sessions Judge, Dhanbad vide judgment dated 26^th September 2018.

5. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Joseph Stephen and Others versus Santhanasamy and others reported in Live Law (SC) 83 and also judgment passed by this Court in Cr. Revision No. 661 of 2022[Ajay Paul @ Ajay Pal versus state of Jharkhand] decided on 23.02.2024, the present revision petition is not maintainable.

6. Accordingly, this revision application is dismissed as not maintainable.

2

7. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

8. Upon being approached by the petitioner, the office is directed to return the certified copies of the judgements passed by the concerned courts in these proceedings upon being replaced by a true/photocopy of the such judgments.

9. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

Aditi