2020 (8) TMI 254 - HC - Indian Laws

Condonation of delay in filing revision application - Dishonor of cheque - no rebuttal to prove innocence - quantum of punishment granted - HELD THAT - At the time of the pronouncement of the judgment, the applicant was not present in the Court and later on he surrendered himself before the J.M.F.C. On 29.08.2019 and sent to the judicial custody. The applicant has completed the jail sentence of six months and he is going to complete the remaining jail sentence i.e. six months in place of payment of fine, therefore, no useful purpose would be served to condone the delay as the applicant is neither having a good prima facie case nor hope to succeed in it. He has already undergone a major part of the sentence. He has no amount to offer for payment to the complainant. He has already applied before the competent Court seeking a declaration to be bankrupt, therefore, even if the delay is condoned, there would be a chance of success in this Revision on merit - The Tehsildar, Anjad has initiated proceeding for attachment and auction sale of his house No.15, M.G. Road, Anjad for recovery of ₹ 19,55,000/- for payment of the fine amount already imposed in five cases filed against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, thus, there are no ground to condone the delay and admit this Revision for final argument. Revision dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Application for early hearing
- Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
- Condonation of delay in filing Revision
- Examination of prima facie case in favor of the applicant

Early Hearing Application:
The court allowed the application for early hearing based on the reasons mentioned in the application, and the matter was taken up through video conferencing.

Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act:
The Revision was found to be barred by 966 days, prompting the applicant to file an application for condonation of delay. The applicant cited being the sole bread earner, his wife's inability to manage documents and fees, and his incarceration since 29.08.2019 as reasons for the delay. However, the court noted that the applicant did not provide a valid explanation for the delay between the judgment date and his surrender in 2019, leading to the rejection of the application for condonation of delay.

Condonation of Delay in Filing Revision:
The applicant, a proprietor facing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, failed to make timely submissions leading to his conviction. Despite the applicant's claims of a good prima facie case and potential success, the court found no valid explanation for the delay in filing the Revision. The court highlighted the applicant's ongoing incarceration, lack of presence during the judgment pronouncement, and financial difficulties as factors contributing to the dismissal of the Revision. The court emphasized that the applicant had already served a significant part of the sentence and had no funds for payment or defense, further solidifying the decision to dismiss the Revision.

Examination of Prima Facie Case:
The court detailed the sequence of events leading to the applicant's conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Despite the applicant's appeal and subsequent surrender, the court found no substantial grounds to condone the delay or admit the Revision for final arguments. The applicant's financial distress, ongoing legal proceedings for debt recovery, and lack of prospects for success in the Revision were pivotal in the court's decision to dismiss the Revision and dispose of all pending applications, ultimately sending the records back to the concerned court.