Disposed

Subodh v. Navratan

Rajasthan HC9 May 2023CRLAS/897/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a criminal appeal as not maintainable. The court held appeals cannot lie against probation orders or for sentence enhancement in complaint cases. However, it examined the record sua moto, found no infirmity, and ordered fresh deposit of the bond amount to extinguish the dispute.

What did the court decide?

The accused was directed to submit a fresh demand draft; existing difficulties regarding the bond were resolved by the parties, and the appeal was disposed of.

Subodh Vs Navratan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/014607]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 897/2019

¶4

Subodh S/o Shri Shyamlal Baheti, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Veer Sanwarkar Chowk, Bhilwara.

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Navratan S/o Sh. Moolsingh Bafna, Proprietor Bafna Traders, Behind Bhadada Bagh, Dwarkadhish Mandir Ke Pass, Bhilwara.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Ramesh Purohit}
	Mr. Avinash Bhati}
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Javeed Gauri, PP Mr. Ashok Kumar

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

09/05/2023

¶13

By way of filing the instant Criminal Appeal challenge has been made to the judgment dated 28.11.2017 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.1, Bhilwara in Criminal Case No.1450/2009 (308/2007) whereby, the learned Magistrate though convicted the accused-respondent but extended benefit of probation under the Probation of Offenders Act in his favour and he was directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards cost of proceedings as well as to deposit a demand draft in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- before the trial court, which is to be paid to the appellant.

¶14

Upon an application moved by the appellant seeking conversion of the criminal leave to appeal into an appeal, the

[2023/RJJD/014607]

[CRLAS-897/2019]

(2 of 4)

Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.01.2019 allowed the application and thus, the instant appeal.

¶19

In my considered opinion, as envisaged under Section 378 (4) of the Cr.P.C. in a case instituted upon a complaint, a Criminal Leave to Appeal can only be preferred against the judgment of acquittal; in the instant case conviction order has been passed by the learned trial Court.

¶20

A Criminal Appeal under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. can be preferred by a victim or a complainant of a case instituted upon a police report or otherwise of a complaint. There is no provision under the Code of Criminal Procedure where the complainant of a complaint case can seek for enhancement of sentence or for grievance against the inadequacy of sentence. The appeal under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. can only be filed in three contingencies (a) Judgment of acquittal, (b) convicting for a lesser offence and (c) inadequacy of compensation. As such even Section 372 Cr.P.C. does not allow a complainant to prefer an appeal against the judgment of conviction or extension of benefit of probation of offenders Act to the accused. Thus, prima facie the appeal is not maintainable before this Court.

¶21

The provision contained under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. gives an absolute authority to the Court of Sessions or to the High Courts to examine legality, correctness and propriety of any order, sentence etc. if a Criminal Revision Petition is preferred. Since, the order impugned has been passed by the learned Magistrate, thus, a Criminal Revision Petition would lie only before the Court of Sessions.

[2023/RJJD/014607]

[CRLAS-897/2019]

(3 of 4)

This Court is of the view that the power of examining legality, correctness and propriety of the order of sentence can be examined by this Court suo moto. As the instant matter is pending before this Court since the year 2018, thus, despite nonmaintainability of the appeal, I have scanned the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court. 7. It is emanating from the record that during the course of trial on 15.11.2017, a demand draft No.616870 in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- issued by the Punjab & Sind Bank Branch Bhopalganj, Bhilwara was tendered by the accused-respondent before the trial Court. As per the allegations made in the complaint, two cheques amounting to Rs.50,000/- in total Rs.1,00,00/-were dishonoured upon presentation to the Bank. Owing to the account closed. Thus, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Magistrate had directed that demand draft of Rs.1,00,000/- submitted by the accused be handed over to the complainant-appellant and Rs.25,000/- as cost of proceeding was also imposed upon him. Looking to the nature of offence, circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by the counsel for the parties and the other factors, the learned trial Court deemed it appropriate to extend benefit of Probation to the accused-respondent as provided under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.

¶26

Prima facie there seems no illegality, infirmity or impropriety in passing the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court. In view of the re-establishment of the relationship between the parties and to maintain peace and harmony, as both the parties are traders and belongs to the same vicinity, this Court

[2023/RJJD/014607]

[CRLAS-897/2019]

(4 of 4)

deems it appropriate to direct the accused-respondent to submit a fresh demand draft amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- since the validity of demand draft No.616870 deposited with the Court has expired.

¶31

In this course and with the consent of the parties, the demand draft available on record has been handed over to the counsel for the respondent on 04.05.2023 with a direction to submit fresh demand draft of the same amount. In the aforesaid course of the event, learned counsel for the accused-respondent has submitted renewed demand draft of the same amount i.e. Rs.1,00,000/-, which has been handed over to the counsel for the appellant during the course of hearing. A further amount of Rs.25,000/- in cash has also been handed over to the counsel for the appellant before the Court for the sake of permanent burial of dispute between the parties. It is to be noted that an amount of Rs.25,000/- as cost of proceeding has already been deposited by the accused-respondent before the trial Court, thus no grievance has been left between the parties. Now, nothing survives to proceed further in the matter, therefore, the instant appeal deserves to be disposed of.

¶32

Accordingly, the instant criminal appeal is disposed of in the terms mentioned above.

¶33

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶34

218-Mamta/-

Subodh v. Navratan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subodh v. Navratan

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

Ravindrakumar Sharma Vs Gautam Bohra

Sohan @ Sonu Vs State of Rajasthan

Sohan @ Sonu Vs State of Rajasthan

Manju Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Manohar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jaypal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan