9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant s jail sentence was suspended only for a limited period but the applicant after being released on bail, not surrendered before the trial Court within prescribed time after lapse of period of temporary bail - This is also not a good conduct of the applicant, which has to be taken into consideration. In such circumstances, this Court is of the firm view that the applicant is not entitled for reduction of sentence awarded to him. This criminal revision is partly allowed - Only sentence of fine of ₹ 10,000/- for each four counts is set aside and remaining other sentences imposed by the appellate Court is affirmed - Since the applicant is not in jail at present, the applicant is directed to surrender before the trial Court within 15 days from the date of this order to undergo the remaining part of jail sentence. - Criminal Revision No.1350/2020 - - - Dated:- 2-3-2021 - Hon ble Shri Justice Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan For the Applicants : Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Mukesh Kumar Shukla and Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel ORDER (PASSED ON THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2021) The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act against both the applicants before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katni, being R.T. No.4231/2012. Learned trial Court after completing the trial, delivered a judgment on 15.3.2016, whereby convicted both the applicants for offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act and passed an order of sentence against the applicant No.1 to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year (Four counts for each cheque) and calculated the compensation @ 9% and fixed the compensation amount ₹ 53,76,000/- to be paid to the respondent by the applicants. 3. Both the applicants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 15.3.2016 passed by the trial Court, preferred an appeal before the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Katni (M.P.), which was registered as Criminal Appeal No.2700046/2016. Learned appellate Court after hearing both the parties, concluded the appeal and passed a judgment on 7.12.2016, whereby affirmed the conviction passed against the applicants and reduced the sentence of 1 year Rigorous Imprisonment to till rising of Court, however, fine of ₹ 10,000/- was also imposed for each four counts. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our counts. This Court finds that this additional imposition of fine of ₹ 10,000/- for each four counts is erroneous. Section 386 of the Cr.P.C. is relevant in this context, which reads as under:- 386. Power of the Appellate Court. After perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears, and the Public Prosecutor if he appears, and in case of an appeal under section 377 or section 378, the accused, if he appears, the Appellate Court may, if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, dismiss the appeal, or may- (a) in an appeal from an order or acquittal, reverse such order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the accused be re- tried or committed for trial, as the case may be, or find him guilty and pass sentence on him according to law; (b) in an appeal from a conviction- (i) reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, or order him to be retried by a Court of competent jurisdiction subordinate to such Appellate Court or committed for trial, or (ii) alter the finding, maintaining the sentence, or (iii) with or without altering the finding, alter the nature or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... undergone by the applicant in custody. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that this case is pending since 2012 and the applicant has still not paid the compensation amount even after affirmation of conviction and compensation imposed by the trial Court. The applicant deposited a bank draft before the trial Court with an objection that the amount may not be paid to the respondent. That draft was in force for a limited period. If the objection has not been raised by the applicant, the draft might have been encashed by the respondent. Despite the order of this Court, the respondent has not received the amount of bank draft deposited before the trial Court. The applicant deter the respondent from receiving the amount of compensation, which was deposited by the applicant through a bank draft before the trial Court. Even Hon ble the Apex Court has directed the applicant to deposit the money but despite that order, the applicant has not paid any amount to the respondent. Considering the conduct of the applicant, imprisonment imposed by the trial Court seems justified because he breached the faith of commercial transaction. 11. Hon ble the Apex Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tence of one year may have to be awarded and compensation under Section 357(3) is considered inadequate, having regard to the amount of the cheque, the financial capacity and the conduct of the accused or any other circumstances. 14. After going through all the orders passed by Hon ble the Apex Court, this Court, appellate Court and by the trial Court, it is reflected that the applicant was released on bail and his jail sentence was suspended by this Court due to widespread of Covid-19 pandemic. The applicant was having an opportunity to renew the bank draft but despite the orders passed by this Court and by Hon ble the Apex Court, the applicant did not obey the directions. It reveals that the conduct of the applicant is not bonafide for the payment of compensation and he breached the faith of commercial transaction for which NI Act was enacted. 15. As discussed in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra), previously the imprisonment was upto one year, which was later on revised by an amendment and converted into two years. This is only to deter the dishonest persons, who disturbed the faith of commercial transactions. 16. In the above circumstances, this Court does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
