Allowed

Shri Devraj Bhati Son of Late Shri Champalal Bhati v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Mar 2025SOSR/53/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conviction under Section 138 NI Act upheld in appeal; the accused sought suspension of sentence pending revision. The High Court suspended the sentence during pendency of the revision petition, subject to deposit of Rs.2,00,000 and a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended during pendency of revision, subject to deposit of Rs.2,00,000 and personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each.

Shri Devraj Bhati Son of Late Shri Champalal Bhati Vs… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:9126]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Suspension of Sentence Application No.53/2025

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 284/2025

¶6

Shri Devraj Bhati Son of Late Shri Champalal Bhati, Resident Of House No. 2, Navrang Nagar, Chhawani Road, Beawar, Owner Bhati Poultry Farm, Near Bhomiyaji Than, Dungri Road, Beawar.

¶7

----Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶10

Shri Devender Mewada Son of Late Shri Rajmal Mewada, Resident Of Koti Chowk, Pali Bazar, Beawar

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Applicant	: Mr.	Saurabh Bhandari,Adv.
For Respondent	: Mr.	Vivek Choudhary,PP

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶14

Order

¶15

03/03/2025

¶16

The present application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the accused-applicant challenging the order dated 13.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Beawer, District Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as the 'Appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No.16/2024 whereby, learned Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal filed on behalf of the accusedapplicant has upheld the order dated 04.02.2023 passed by Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases), Beawer (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in Regular Criminal Case No.2526/2015 by which the accused-applicant was convicted for

[2025:RJ-JP:9126]

[CRLR-284/2025]

(2 of 3)

the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1881’) and was sentenced to simple imprisonment of one year and 6 months with a fine of Rs.7,50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he has to further undergo two months simple imprisonment.

¶21

Feeling aggrieved of the orders dated 13.11.2024 and 04.02.2023, the present application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the accused-applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the petitioner was on bail during trial and during pendency of the appeal before learned Appellate Court. Learned counsel further submitted that the petition is not likely to be disposed of in the near future, therefore, the impugned orders dated 13.11.2024 and 04.02.2023 passed by learned Courts be suspended.

¶22

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 has opposed the contention advanced by learned counsel for the accused-applicant. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the fact that the revision petition is not likely to be disposed of in near future, therefore, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the accusedapplicant.

¶23

In the facts and circumstances of the case and to balance the equity, this Court directs that the impugned order dated 04.02.2023 passed by learned trial Court and affirmed by learned Appellate Court vide order dated 13.11.2024, shall remain suspended during pendency of this revision petition.

[2025:RJ-JP:9126]

[CRLR-284/2025]

(3 of 3)

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed by the accused-applicant is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence awarded vide orders dated 13.11.2024 and 04.02.2023 to the accused-applicant namely, Shri Devraj Bhati S/o Late Shri Champalal Bhati in this matter shall remain suspended during the pendency of this petition on the following conditions:

¶28

The accused-applicant shall deposit Rs.2,00,000/- before the trial Court.

¶29

The accused-applicant shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this court on 27.03.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

¶30

On deposition of Rs.2,00,000/- by the accused-applicant, learned trial Court is directed to disburse the amount to the complainant/respondent on the undertaking to be furnished by the complainant/respondent that in case the accused-applicant succeeds in this petition then the complainant/respondent shall repay the amount so received along with the interest @ 6% per annum.

¶31

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶32

AARZOO ARORA /11

Shri Devraj Bhati Son of Late Shri Champalal Bhati v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Devraj Bhati Son of Late Shri Champalal Bhati 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

Santosh Devi D/O Late Kabulchand Saini S/O Late Shri Bhudhar W/O Shri Shisram Vs Bansilal S/O Moolchand

N I C Vs Burma Devi

Iffco-Tokio Gen Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt Samod Devi and Ors.

Bheemsingh Son of Jasvant Vs Sanjay Kumar Son of Ramavtar

Mukesh Kumar Pandey Son of Rajendra Pandey Vs Raksha Pandey Wife of Mukesh Kumar Pandey

Yashoda W/O Santosh D/O Radhey Shyam B/C Koli Vs Santosh S/O Vishanlal B/C Koli