Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 3046 (BOM)

Sharangdhar Raghunath Upadhyay v. Jyoti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Kopargaon, Branch Kolar

2018-12-21

P.R.BORA

body2018
JUDGMENT P.R. Bora, J. - Heard Shri K.B. Borde, learned Counsel appearing for the revisionist and Shri A.S. Gandhi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. The revisionist was convicted by the JMFC Court at Rahata in Summary Criminal Case No.138 of 2006 decided on 29.08.2015 for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and was sentenced to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six months and was also directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/. The revisionist accused was further directed to pay the compensation amount of Rs. 5,00,000/to the original complainant. The revisionist filed Criminal Appeal No.41 of 2015 before the Sessions Court at Kopargaon. The said appeal has been partly allowed by the Sessions Court and the order passed by the Trial Court is modified only to the extent of fine and the order of fine imposed by the Magistrate is set aside and rest of the order is confirmed. Aggrieved by, the present revision application is filed by the present revisionist-applicant. 2. Today, when the present matter is taken up for hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant informed that, the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/has been deposited in this Court in installments. The learned Counsel further submitted that, the applicant has already undergone the imprisonment for 14 days. The learned Counsel, in the circumstances, has restricted his prayer to modify the sentence as has been awarded by the Trial Court and to release the applicant on the sentence already undergone. The learned Counsel for the respondent has no objection for accepting the request so made, since the applicant has deposited the amount of compensation in this Court. 3. After having considered the submissions, it appears to me that, the request so made by the revisionist deserves to be considered. In view of the fact that, the amount of compensation has been deposited by the applicant in this Court and further that, he has already undergone the imprisonment for 14 days, I deem it appropriate to pass the following order. ORDER (i) Though the conviction of the applicant for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintained, the substantive sentence as has been awarded by the Court below has been modified and the applicant is sentenced to suffer the imprisonment already undergone. (ii) The direction as about the amount of compensation is maintained. ORDER (i) Though the conviction of the applicant for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintained, the substantive sentence as has been awarded by the Court below has been modified and the applicant is sentenced to suffer the imprisonment already undergone. (ii) The direction as about the amount of compensation is maintained. As noted herein above, the amount of compensation has already been deposited. (iii) It would be open for the respondent to withdraw the amount of compensation along with interest accrued thereon. (iv) The revision application stands partly allowed in the aforesaid terms. (v) Pending Criminal Application, if any, stands disposed of.