Kusum Lata Vs Mahavir Goyal — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

Kusum Lata Vs Mahavir Goyal — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order continued only for another 60 days, subject to the appeal being decided within two months; continuance extended for periods of delay attributable to the complainant, the Court, or causes beyond the convict's control; all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the convict-petitioner's challenge to the Appellate Court's order dated 02.01.2019 directing deposit of Rs.3 lacs (25% of the compensation amount) warranted continuation of interim protection while the underlying appeal remained undecided.

Ratio / Principle

The revision petition is disposed of subject to the condition that the appeal itself shall be decided within a period of two months, if not already decided.

Key takeaways

The interim order is to continue only for another 60 days.ratio¶4
It is clarified that if the matter is delayed on account of the complainant, the interim order shall continue for the period of such delay, whether caused by the complainant, at the instance of the Court, or by the convict beyond his control.ratio¶4

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh (Anoop Chitkara, J., decision dated 14.01.2026) disposed of revision petition CRR-295-2019 filed by Kusum Lata, convict-petitioner aggrieved by the Appellate Court's order dated 02.01.2019 directing her to deposit Rs.3 lacs, i.e. 25% of the compensation amount, arising out of Criminal NACT No. 4413/2016 titled “Mahavir Goyal v/s Kusum Lata” under Complaint Section 138 of NI Act. Earlier, interim protection had been granted through orders of 12.02.2019, 05.03.2019 and 05.04.2019, after which the petitioner stopped appearing before this Court; on the decision date none appeared for the parties. Making the disposal conditional, the Court directed that the appeal itself be decided within two months, if not already decided, and continued the interim order only for another 60 days, clarifying that it would extend for any period of delay caused by the complainant, at the instance of the Court, or by the convict beyond his control. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Marked speaking/reasoned: Yes; reportable: No.

208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRR-295-2019 Date of Decision: 14.01.2026

Kusum Lata

...Petitioner

Versus

Mahavir Goyal

…Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present: None for the parties.

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

Criminal NACT No. 4413/2016 titled “Mahavir Goyal v/s Kusum Lata” under Complaint Section 138 of NI Act No.

Aggrieved by order dated 02.01.2019 wherein direction by the Appellate Court to deposit Rs.3 lacs i.e. 25% of compensation amount, the convict-petitioner had come up before this Court by filing the present revision petition.

Vide order dated 12.02.2019, a Co-ordinate Bench had directed the trial Court to adjourn the case beyond the date given by this Court. After that, on the next date of hearing i.e. 05.03.2019, the appearance of the petitioner was exempted before the Appellate Court. On 05.04.2019, another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had stayed further action by the Sessions Court. After that, the petitioner stopped appearing before this Court.

Case called twice but none has put in appearance on behalf of the parties.

I have gone through the record. In the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of subject to the condition that the appeal itself shall be decided within a period of two months, if not already decided. Interim order to continue only for another 60 days. It is clarified that if the matter is delayed on behalf of the complainant, then the interim order shall continue for the period for which the matter was delayed either by the complainant or at the instance of the Court or for the delay caused by the convict which is beyond his control. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

14.01.2026 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

JYOTI SHARMA 2026.01.16 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

1