In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Vs. M/S Siddharath International and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1126318
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnFeb-11-2014
AppellantIn the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
RespondentM/S Siddharath International and Others
Excerpt:
cra-s-3518-sb-2013 (o&m) 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh cra-s-3518-sb-2013 (o&m) date of decision: february 11, 2014 m/s jain udhay hosiery pvt. ltd. …petitioner versus m/s siddharath international and others …respondent coram: hon’ble mr. justice naresh kumar sanghi present: mr. ravinder singh randhawa, advocate, for the appellant. naresh kumar sanghi, j.1. the present criminal appeal has been filed by the complainant, m/s jain udhay hosiery pvt. ltd., challenging the judgment dated 30.4.2013, passed by the learned judicial magistrate ist class, ludhiana, whereby the respondents-accused were convicted and each one of them was ordered to undergo the sentence till rising of the court. they were collectively ordered to deposit `1,15,000/- inclusive of the amount of the cheque in dispute and costs of the litigation. the appellant- complainant was held entitled to withdraw the amount of compensation in terms of section 357, cr.p.c. the respondents- accused deposited the amount before the learned trial court on the day they were convicted and sentenced.2. learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order of sentence and imposing aggregate fine of `1,15,000/- is on lesser side, therefore, the present appeal be entertained and kapoor prashant 2014.02.13 16:38 i attest to the accuracy of this order cra-s-3518-sb-2013 (o&m) 2 the respondents-accused be directed to pay more compensation to the appellant-complainant. to support his submissions, he further argued that the respondents-accused did not appear before the learned trial court for three years and during pendency of the trial, all of a sudden an application was moved and they confessed their guilt and they were ordered to undergo the sentence till rising of the court only.3. i have heard learned counsel for the appellant- complainant and gone through the material available on record.4. concededly, the appellant-complainant and the respondents-accused are businessmen. they had the business dealings with each other. due to variety of reasons, the cheque issued by the respondents-accused could not be encahsed and, as such, the appellant-complainant was constrained to file a complaint under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 (for brevity, 'the act').5. since the respondents-accused put in appearance before the learned court below, effort were made to get the compromise effected, but they could not persuade the appellant- complainant to effect a compromise, therefore, in their wisdom the respondents-accused confessed their guilt and the learned trial court accepted their confession and held them guilty under section 138 of the act and passed the order of sentence, as has been noted herein above. the reasons recorded by the learned kapoor prashant 2014.02.13 16:38 i attest to the accuracy of this order cra-s-3518-sb-2013 (o&m) 3 judicial magistrate ist class, ludhiana, cannot be said to be perverse or against the material available on record, rather the approach of the learned trial court was absolutely correct and the same is affirmed by this court.6. it is also to be noted that there is delay of more than three months in filing the present appeal and this court is not even convinced to entertain the appeal at this stage. therefore, the appeal as well as the criminal miscellaneous application for condonation of delay are hereby dismissed. (naresh kumar sanghi) february 11, 2014 judge pkapoor kapoor prashant 2014.02.13 16:38 i attest to the accuracy of this order
Judgment:

CRA-S-3518-SB-2013 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-3518-SB-2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 11, 2014 M/s Jain Udhay Hosiery Pvt. Ltd. …Petitioner Versus M/s Siddharath International and others …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI Present: Mr. Ravinder Singh Randhawa, Advocate, for the appellant. NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.

1. The present criminal appeal has been filed by the complainant, M/s Jain Udhay Hosiery Pvt. Ltd., challenging the judgment dated 30.4.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, whereby the respondents-accused were convicted and each one of them was ordered to undergo the sentence till rising of the Court. They were collectively ordered to deposit `1,15,000/- inclusive of the amount of the cheque in dispute and costs of the litigation. The appellant- complainant was held entitled to withdraw the amount of compensation in terms of Section 357, Cr.P.C. The respondents- accused deposited the amount before the learned Trial Court on the day they were convicted and sentenced.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order of sentence and imposing aggregate fine of `1,15,000/- is on lesser side, therefore, the present appeal be entertained and Kapoor Prashant 2014.02.13 16:38 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-3518-SB-2013 (O&M) 2 the respondents-accused be directed to pay more compensation to the appellant-complainant. To support his submissions, he further argued that the respondents-accused did not appear before the learned Trial Court for three years and during pendency of the trial, all of a sudden an application was moved and they confessed their guilt and they were ordered to undergo the sentence till rising of the Court only.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant- complainant and gone through the material available on record.

4. Concededly, the appellant-complainant and the respondents-accused are businessmen. They had the business dealings with each other. Due to variety of reasons, the cheque issued by the respondents-accused could not be encahsed and, as such, the appellant-complainant was constrained to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for brevity, 'the Act').

5. Since the respondents-accused put in appearance before the learned Court below, effort were made to get the compromise effected, but they could not persuade the appellant- complainant to effect a compromise, therefore, in their wisdom the respondents-accused confessed their guilt and the learned Trial Court accepted their confession and held them guilty under Section 138 of the Act and passed the order of sentence, as has been noted herein above. The reasons recorded by the learned Kapoor Prashant 2014.02.13 16:38 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRA-S-3518-SB-2013 (O&M) 3 Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, cannot be said to be perverse or against the material available on record, rather the approach of the learned Trial Court was absolutely correct and the same is affirmed by this Court.

6. It is also to be noted that there is delay of more than three months in filing the present appeal and this Court is not even convinced to entertain the appeal at this stage. Therefore, the appeal as well as the criminal miscellaneous application for condonation of delay are hereby dismissed. (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) February 11, 2014 JUDGE Pkapoor Kapoor Prashant 2014.02.13 16:38 I attest to the accuracy of this order