Dismissed

Arjun v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 May 2023CRLR/5/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur dismissed the petition challenging the conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour. The Court found no merit as the appeal had been dismissed and no legal flaw was evident.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition was dismissed with the stay petition and any pending applications disposed of.

Arjun Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/016458]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 5/2022

¶4

Arjun S/o Omprakash, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bijoliya P.s. Bijoliya Dist. Bhilwara (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Ram Swaroop S/o Gopal Lal, Bijoliya Dist. Bhilwara (Raj.).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, AGA

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶12

Order

¶13

DATE OF ORDER ::: 18/05/2023

¶14

BY THE COURT:-

¶15

This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.07.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bijoliya, District Bhilwara in connection with Criminal Original Case No.24/2015 whereby the learned court below convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for a period of one year and fine of Rs.3,20,000/- and in default to further undergo 2 months S.I. and also for quashing of the judgment dated 17.11.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara in Criminal Appeal No.41/2020 preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence of the trial court was confirmed.

[2023/RJJD/016458]

[CRLR-5/2022]

(2 of 3)

What is emanating from the record that after 15.11.2022 the matter was listed before the Court on several occasions but no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner to argue the matter. Today, even in the second round of call, no one is present to represent the petitioner.

¶20

Heard learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the orders impugned.

¶21

The brief facts of the case giving rise to the instant revision petition would be that at the instance of the respondent Ram Swaroop, a criminal prosecution came to be launched against the petitioner for committing an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Requisite material was produced in trial to show that the petitioner owe a legal debt towards the respondent and for that the petitioner gave a cheque of Rs.1,60,000/- to the respondent. When the cheque was presented to the Bank concerned, it got dishonored owing to insufficiency of amount in the account of the petitioner. A legal notice was sent to the accused but due to non-making of payment, a criminal complaint was submitted, due opportunity of hearing was granted to both the parties. After taking on record the evidence of the accused-petitioner, he was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. though he claimed innocence but did not opt to adduce evidence in support of his claim.

¶22

The leaned Judge after critical appreciation of evidence and taking into account the law of presumption contained under Section 139 of the N.I. Act, found the petitioner guilty and thus convicted and sentenced to suffer one year’s simple imprisonment

[2023/RJJD/016458]

[CRLR-5/2022]

(3 of 3)

along with fine of Rs.3,20,000/- and in default to further undergo two months simple imprisonment vide judgment dated 09.07.2018.

¶27

Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.07.2018, the accused-petitioner preferred an appeal bearing Appeal No.41/2020 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara. Both the parties were heard again and the learned appellate Court made re-assessment of the evidence and found no error in finding of guilt and thus, the appeal came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 17.11.2021 and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court was affirmed.

¶28

After careful scanning of the orders passed by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned appellate Court, I do not observe any illegality or impropriety therein so as to invoke revisional jurisdiction of this Court. The appeal came to be dismissed on 17.11.2021, probably the accused is not in judicial custody and no endeavor has been made to pursue the instant criminal revision petition.

¶29

Viewing from any angle, there appears no merit in the instant criminal revision petition, therefore, the same deserves dismissal and accordingly dismissed.

¶30

The stay petition and all pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶31

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶32

301-Mamta/-

Arjun v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun v. State of Rajasthan

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

Ghanesh Lal Vs Narayanlal

Suresh Chandra Suwalka Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul Vs Moinudeen

Sahil Ali Vs State of Rajasthan

Gajanand Gurjar Vs Krishna Earth Movers

Mahesh Chandra Vs Babulal