Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Surinder Kumar Grover vs.anil Kumar

Surinder Kumar Grover vs Anil Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Oct 26, 2016
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1203942

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Surinder Kumar Grover

Respondent

Anil Kumar

Excerpt

.....sentences.3. 4. none appeared on behalf of the respondent despite service. since the petitioner has given up challenge to the findings on conviction and there are concurrent findings of the two courts below, conviction under section 138 negotiable instruments act is affirmed.5. nominal roll dated 12.08.2016 reveals that the petitioner has undergone 11 months and 3 days incarceration besides remission for 27 days as on 20.04.2016. it further records that the substantive sentence of the petitioner was completed on 20.04.2016. at present, the petitioner was undergoing default sentence for non-payment of `7 lacs.6. default sentence awarded by the trial court for non-payment of compensation of `7 lacs is one year which is quite excessive. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, while maintaining the conviction, sentence order is modified to the extent that the default sentence for non-payment of compensation of `7 lacs shall be six months instead of one year. other terms and conditions of the sentence order are left undisturbed.7. the revision petition stands disposed of in the above terms. pending applications also stand disposed of.8. the petitioner shall be released forthwith if not required to be detained in any other case. crl.rev.p.30/2016 page 2 of 3 9. trial court record (if any) be sent back forthwith with the copy of the order.10. intimation be sent to the superintendent jail. october26 2016 / tr (s.p.garg) judge crl.rev.p.30/2016 page 3 of 3

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :

26. h OCTOBER, 2016 CRL.REV.P.30/2016 $~21 * + SURINDER KUMAR GROVER ........ Petitioner

Through : Mr.Kumar Vaibhav, Advocate with versus Mohd.Faraz, Advocate. ANIL KUMAR ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.

(Oral) CRL.M.A.No.673/2016 (Delay) 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay in filing the revision petition, the delay is condoned.

2. The application for condonation of delay is disposed of. CRL.REV.P.30/2016, CRL.M.A.No.14220/2016 & CRL.M.B. 86/2016 1. Present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 15.09.2015 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.14/2015 whereby judgment dated 08.05.2015 and sentence order dated 22.05.2015 of learned CMM under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act were upheld. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo SI for one year with compensation `7 lacs to be paid to the complainant; default sentence being SI for one year. Crl.Rev.P.30/2016 Page 1 of 3 2. During the course of arguments, petitioner’s counsel, on instructions, informed that the petitioner has opted to give up challenge to the findings on conviction under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. He, however, prayed to take lenient view as the petitioner has already undergone substantial period of substantive and default sentences.

3. 4. None appeared on behalf of the respondent despite service. Since the petitioner has given up challenge to the findings on conviction and there are concurrent findings of the two Courts below, conviction under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act is affirmed.

5. Nominal Roll dated 12.08.2016 reveals that the petitioner has undergone 11 months and 3 days incarceration besides remission for 27 days as on 20.04.2016. It further records that the substantive sentence of the petitioner was completed on 20.04.2016. At present, the petitioner was undergoing default sentence for non-payment of `7 lacs.

6. Default sentence awarded by the Trial Court for non-payment of compensation of `7 lacs is one year which is quite excessive. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, while maintaining the conviction, sentence order is modified to the extent that the default sentence for non-payment of compensation of `7 lacs shall be six months instead of one year. Other terms and conditions of the sentence order are left undisturbed.

7. The revision petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

8. The petitioner shall be released forthwith if not required to be detained in any other case. Crl.Rev.P.30/2016 Page 2 of 3 9. Trial Court record (if any) be sent back forthwith with the copy of the order.

10. Intimation be sent to the Superintendent Jail. OCTOBER26 2016 / tr (S.P.GARG) JUDGE Crl.Rev.P.30/2016 Page 3 of 3

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial