Dismissed

Harish Dhanwani Son of Shri Mahadev Dhanwani v. Nirmal Kumar Sankhala Son of Shri Jeetmal Sankhala

Rajasthan HC7 Nov 2022CRLAS/1427/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed appellant's petition seeking to contest acquittal in cheque bounce case. Held, after acquittal in 138 NI Act case, complainant must file Special Leave Petition under Section 378(4) CrPC, not a writ petition. Writ jurisdiction under Section 24 lơ/keqDr cannot be invoked.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file Special Leave Petition under Section 378(4) CrPC. Dismissed otherwise.

Harish Dhanwani Son of Shri Mahadev Dhanwani Vs Nirmal… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1427/2022

¶3

Harish Dhanwani Son Of Shri Mahadev Dhanwani, Resident Of Mahadev Bhawan Janta Colony, Chorasiyawas Road, Ajmer

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Nirmal Kumar Sankhala Son Of Shri Jeetmal Sankhala, Resident Of G-6, Shivgyan Avenue-2, Yudhistir Marg, Near Yojna Bhawan, C-Scheme, Jaipur

¶7

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Peush Nag For Respondent(s) :

¶8

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA

¶9

Order

¶10

07/11/2022

¶11

;g vihy vihykFkhZ@ifjoknh dh vksj ls fopkj.k U;k;ky;] fof'k"V U;kf;d eftLVªsV ¼,u vkbZ izdj.k½ la[;k&1] vtesj ds vkyksP; vkns'k fnukad 03-06-2022] ftlds }kjk vihykFkhZ@ifjoknh dh vksj ls izLrqr ifjokn varxZr /kkjk 138 ijØkE; fy[kr vf/kfu;e] 1881 fo:) izR;FkhZ@vfHk;qDr fujLr djrs gq, izR;FkhZ@vfHk;qDr dks lansg dk ykHk fn;k tkdj nks"keqDr ?kksf"kr dj fn;k x;k] ls O;fFkr gksdj izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶12

vihy dh i`"BHkwfe ls lEcfU/kr rF; bl izdkj gSa fd vihykFkhZ@ ifjoknh dh vksj ls fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa ifjokn bl vk'k; dk is'k fd;k x;k fd vfHk;qDr us viuh futh vko';drk gsrq ifjoknh ls nks yk[k :i;s udn m/kkj fy, ftldh vnk;xh isVs vius [kkrs ds nks pSd fn, o pSd esa of.kZr jkf'k dk Hkqxrku gksus dk vk'oklu fn;k] ijUrq mDr pSd cSad esa is'k djus ij ises.V LVkWIM ckbZ MªkWvj dh fVIi.kh lfgr ykSVk fn;k x;kA tfj, vf/koDrk uksfVl nsus ij Hkh vfHk;qDr us jkf'k ugha ykVkbZ&&vkfnA mDr ifjokn ij vfHk;qDr ds fo:) vijk/k /kkjk 138 ,uvkbZ ,DV dk izlaKku fy;k tkdj izdj.k ntZ jftLVj fd;k

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLAS-1427/2022]

¶15

x;k o vfHk;qDr dks ryc fd;k x;kA izdj.k dk fopkj.k fd;k tkdj vfHk;qDr dks fopkj.k U;k;ky; us mDr vijk/k esa lansg dk ykHk nsdj nks"keqDr dj fn;kA blh nks"keqfDr ds vkns'k dks pqukSrh nsrs gq, vihykFkhZ@ifjoknh dh vksj ls ;g vihy izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶16

vihy dh iks"k.kh;rk ij fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ dks lquk x;kA

¶17

fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ@ifjoknh dk rdZ gS fd fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk vfHk;qDr dks nks"keqDr fd;s tkus ds dze esa ikfjr fu.kZ; ds fo:) ifjoknh dks mPp U;k;ky; esa vihy izLrqr djus dk mipkj izkIr gS] vr% ifjoknh dh vksj ls /kkjk 378 n.M izfdz;k lafgrk lifBr /kkjk 372 n.M izfdz;k lafgrk ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr izLrqr vihy lquokbZ gsrq xzg.k dh tkosA

¶18

geus rdksZa ij euu fd;kA i=koyh dk /;kuiwoZd v/;;u fd;kA nks"keqfDr ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) vihy ds lEcU/k esa /kkjk 378¼4½ n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds ds varxZr fuEu izko/kku gSa%&

¶19

If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant in this behalf, grants special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal, the complainant may present such an appeal to the High Court.

¶20

mDr izko/kkuksa dks i<+us ls Li"V gS fd tgka nks"keqfDr ds fo:) ifjoknh dh vksj ls vihy izLrqr dh tkrh gS rks ogka /kkjk 378¼4½ n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds izko/kkuksa ds varxZr gh ,slh vihy iks"k.kh; gS vkSj bl gsrq ifjoknh dks mPp U;k;ky; esa fo'ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk izLrqr djuh gksxhA ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vius fu.kZ; Subhash Chand Vs. State (Delhi Admn.) 2013 (2) SC 17 esa ;g fu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd ifjokn ij lafLFkr izdj.k esa ;fn fopkj.k U;k;ky; nks"keqfDr dk fu.kZ; ikfjr djrk gS rks ,sls fu.kZ; ds fo:) ifjoknh /kkjk 378¼4½ n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds izko/kkuksa ds varxZr gh fo'ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk ds vk/kkj ij vuqefr izkIr dj vihy izLrqr dh tk ldrh gS vkSj ifjokn ij lafLFkr izdj.k] ftlesa nks"keqfDr dk fu.kZ; ikfjr gqvk gS] ogka /kkjk 372 n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds izko/kku ifjoknh ds lEcU/k esa ykxw ugha gksrs gS a A

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CRLAS-1427/2022]

¶23

orZeku ekeys esa Hkh fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa vkijkf/kd izdj.k ifjokn ij gh lafLFkr fd;k x;k Fkk ftlesa fnukad 03-06-2022 ds fu.kZ; }kjk vfHk;qDr dks nks"keqDr fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa ,sls vkns'k ds fo:) /kkjk 378¼4½ n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds izko/kkuksa ds varxZr mPp U;k;ky; esa fo'ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk gh izLrqr djuh gksxh] ifjoknh }kjk lh/ks gh vihy izLrqr ugha dh tk ldrh gSA

¶24

fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ }kjk izLrqr U;kf;d fofu'p; Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Vs. The State of Karnatka In The Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal No. 1281-82/2018 esa dgha Hkh ;g fuf.kZr ugha fd;k x;k gS fd ifjoknh nks"keqfDr ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) lh/ks gh mPp U;k;ky; esa vihy izLrqr dj ldrk gSA bl fofu'p; esa Hkh dsoy ihfM+r dks gh nks"keqfDr ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) vihy izLrqr djus ds fy, fn, x, vf/kdkjksa dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gSA mYys[kuh; gS fd /kkjk 138 ijØkE; fy[kr vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa ds varxZr ifjoknh n.M izfØ;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 2¼MCY;w½¼,½ ds varxZr Victim dh ifjHkk"kk esa ugha vkrk gS vkSj /kkjk 372 n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds izko/kku mlds lEcU/k esa ykxw ugha gksrs gS a A tSlk fd Smt.P. Vijay Laxmi Vs. Smt. S.P. Shrwan & Anr. In the High Court of Andhra Pradesh Criminal Appeal No. 16742/2016 Order dated 27-10-2017 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa mi;qZDr U;kf;d fofu'p; (Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Vs. The State of Karnatka) ls fo}ku vf/koDrk vihykFkhZ@ifjoknh dks dksbZ ykHk izkIr ugha gksrk gSA vihykFkhZ }kjk nks"keqfDr ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) izLrqr vihy lh/ks gh bl :i esa Lohdkj fd, tkus ;ksX; ugha gSA

¶25

ifj.kker% vihykFkhZ@ifjoknh dh vksj ls nks"keqfDr ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) izLrqr vihy lh/ks gh vihy ds rkSj ij iks"k.kh; ugha gksus ds dkj.k fujLr dh tkrh gSA vihykFkhZ fof/k vuqlkj vihy vuqefr ;kfpdk izLrqr djus ds fy, Lora= gSA

¶26

(SHUBHA MEHTA),J

¶27

AJAY KUMAR SINGHAL /81

Harish Dhanwani Son of Shri Mahadev Dhanwani v. Nirmal Kumar Sankhala Son of Shri Jeetmal Sankhala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Dhanwani Son of Shri Mahadev Dhanwani v. Nirmal Kumar Sankhala Son of Shri Jeetmal Sankhala

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

Heeralal Dheewar S/O Prabhu Dayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Kumar @ Golu Son of Rajpal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar S/O Shri Kajodmal Raigar Vs Mahesh Kumar Uchhenia S/O Kajodmal

Sharad Anand Verma S/O Anand Prakash Verma Vs Madhuri D/O Chandra Mohan Verma

Rama Agrawal W/O Shri Santosh Kumar Agrawal B/C Mahajan Vs State of Rajasthan

Satnam Singh Randhawa S/O Shri Balwant Singh Randhawa Vs State of Rajasthan