Allowed

Neeraj Agarwal S/O Vimlesh Agarwal B/C Mahajan v. Umashanker Sharma S/O Ghanshyam Sharma B/C Brahmin

Rajasthan HC4 Jan 2020CRLMP/3994/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Against bail forfeiture orders under Cr.P.C. S. 446 due to non-deposit of interim compensation under NI Act S. 143 A, the High Court stayed arrest warrants. Relying on G.J. Raja, it held that disposal was not required when the offence predated the amendment dispensing with such deposit.

What did the court decide?

Arrest warrant and bail bond forfeiture order set aside; proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. stayed.

Neeraj Agarwal S/O Vimlesh Agarwal B/C Mahajan Vs… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3994/2019

¶3

Neeraj Agarwal S/o Vimlesh Agarwal B/c Mahajan, R/o 3-K-18, Shyam Residency, Jawahar Nagar Road, Near Jawahar Nagar Petrol Pump, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Umashanker Sharma S/o Ghanshyam Sharma B/c Brahmin, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Badaya Dharamshala Ke Pichhe, Ganga Ji Ka Mandir, Lahad Ka Kunwa, Town Lalsot, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Raj. 303503.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3995/2019

¶10

Neeraj Agarwal S/o Vimlesh Agarwal B/c Mahajan, R/o 3-K-18, Shyam Residency, Jawahar Nagar Road, Near Jawahar Nagar Petrol Pump, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

Vimlesh Kumar Sain S/o Radhe Shyam Sain B/c Sain, R/o Gangapur Road, Town Lalsot, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Raj. 303503.

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3996/2019

¶16

Neeraj Agarwal S/o Vimlesh Agarwal B/c Mahajan, R/o 3-K-18, Shyam Residency, Jawahar Nagar Road, Near Jawahar Nagar Petrol Pump, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶17

----Petitioner

¶18

Versus

¶19

Manish Khandelwal S/o Krishan Khandelwal B/c Mahajan, R/o Khatwa Road, Town Lalsot, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Raj. 303503.

¶20

----Respondent

¶21

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3997/2019

¶22

Neeraj Agarwal S/o Vimlesh Agarwal B/c Mahajan, R/o 3-K-18, Shyam Residency, Jawahar Nagar Road, Near Jawahar Nagar Petrol Pump, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

(2 of 4)

[CRLMP-3994/2019]

----Petitioner

Versus

Deepak Kumar Sharma S/o Ramnarain Sharma B/c Brahmin, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Uperla Para, Town Lalsot, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Raj. 303503.

¶28

----Respondent

¶29

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3998/2019

¶30

Neeraj Agarwal S/o Vimlesh Agarwal B/c Mahajan, R/o 3-K-18, Shyam Residency, Jawahar Nagar Road, Near Jawahar Nagar Petrol Pump, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶31

Versus

¶32

Rahul Matha S/o Giriraj Prasad Matha B/c Mahajan, R/o Nehru Colony, Town Lalsot, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Raj. 303503.

¶33

----Respondent

¶34

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3999/2019

¶35

Neeraj Agarwal S/o Vimlesh Agarwal B/c Mahajan, R/o 3-K-18, Shyam Residency, Jawahar Nagar Road, Near Jawahar Nagar Petrol Pump, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶36

----Petitioner

¶37

Versus

¶38

Ravishanker Sain S/o Ramesh Chand Sain B/c Sain, R/o Nehru Colony, Near Jyoti School, Town Lalsot, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Raj. 303503.

¶39

----Respondent

¶40

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Soni For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kailash Chander Sharma

¶41

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶42

Order

¶43

04/01/2020

¶44

These miscellaneous petitions have been filed by the petitioners against the order passed by the Trial Court dated 13.6.2019 whereby the bail bonds were forfeited of the accused

¶45

(3 of 4)

¶46

[CRLMP-3994/2019]

¶47

petitioners and directions were issued to initiate proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. and they were directed to be produced by arrest warrants as they did not present themselves before the court on that date.

¶48

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were represented through their counsel and as per the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, a person who is accused, can represent himself or appear through counsel and his personal presence is not necessarily required on each date. Moreover, the petitioners had moved an application for dispensing with their personal attendance. However learned trial court has rejected the said application solely on the ground that amount of 20% as directed as interim compensation in terms of amendment made under Section 143 A was not deposited. Learned counsel submits that as the law relating to deposit of interim compensation has been set up by making it prospective and in the present cases the cheque dishonoured is prior to the amendment made under Section 143 A, it was not necessary for the petitioners to deposit the interim compensation and this court has already decided the other miscellaneous petitions listed before this court today and has dispensed with the said requirement therein. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners shall be ready to present themselves on all dates as directed from time to time by the court and will also co-operate in disposal of the cases.

¶49

I have considered the submissions and find that this court had stayed the execution of the arrest warrant and also stayed the further proceedings in the court below.

¶50

Keeping in view the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the law as laid down in G.J. Raja Versus Tejraj

¶51

(4 of 4)

¶52

[CRLMP-3994/2019]

¶53

Surana, AIR 2019 SC 3817 , this court finds that learned Magistrate has fallen in error in rejecting the application for dispensing with personal attendance of the petitioners and there was no reason to issue arrest warrant and forfeit bail bonds. Thus, the order passed by the learned Magistrate is accordingly set aside. The order passed in revision rejecting the revision application is accordingly set aside. The trial court shall now proceed with the matter and expeditiously dispose of the cases as already directed in the other miscellaneous petitions decided today.

¶54

Accordingly, these petitions stand disposed of. All pending application shall stand disposed of.

¶55

A copy of this order be placed in each connected petition.

¶56

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶57

Karan Bhutani /531/13-18

Neeraj Agarwal S/O Vimlesh Agarwal B/C Mahajan v. Umashanker Sharma S/O Ghanshyam Sharma B/C Brahmin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Agarwal S/O Vimlesh Agarwal B/C Mahajan v. Umashanker Sharma S/O Ghanshyam Sharma B/C Brahmin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Ashu Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Prem Chand Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Kapil Bhargava S/O Shri Heera Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Religare Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan

Neeraj Agarwal S/O Vimlesh Agarwal B/C Mahajan Vs Manish Khandelwal S/O Krishan Khandelwal B/C Mahajan

Neeraj Agarwal S/O Vimlesh Agarwal B/C Mahajan Vs Deepak Kumar Sharma S/O Ramnarain Sharma B/C Brahmin