Full Text
Translation output
% 01.06.2011
Present: Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh and Mr. Jaswant Singh, Adv. for the petitioner.
Mr. M.K. Sethi, Adv. for respondent no.l.
Mr. Arvind Gupta, APP for the State-respondent no.2.
+ Crl. Rev. P. No. 152/2011
Petitioner has been convicted under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months; he was also directed to pay compensation of ?2 lakhs to the complainant (respondent no.l) and in default of payment of compensation to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment. Petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No. 138/2010 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi against his conviction. Sentence as awarded by the Trial Court was also challenged. By the order dated 22^^ February, 2011 Additional
Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as Appellate Court) has upheld the conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the
Act. However, sentence has been reduced to 1 month simple imprisonment. Compensation amount has also been reduced to
?1.50 lakh. Having remained dissatisfied by the order of the
Appellate Court, petitioner has approached this Court by way of
2011:DHC:19798
I present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section
401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, has given up challenge to the conviction of the petitioner on merits. He has prayed for leniency in the order on sentence. It is contended that petitioner is 52 years of age with no criminal antecedent. In case petitioner is sent to prison his whole family, comprising of ailing wife and mentally retarded child, shall immensely suffer. Having regard to the facts and circumstances that petitioner has to support his ailing wife and mentally retarded child, while upholding the conviction of the petitioner, his sentence of 1 month simple imprisonment is done away with while enhancing the compensation to ?1,65,000/-. A sum of ^15,000/- has been paid in cash by the petitioner to the counsel for respondent no. 1 in Court today. A sum of ?1,50,000/- has already been deposited in the Registry of this Court by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated l^t April, 2011. Let this amount of ^1,50,000/- together with interest accrued thereon be released to respondent no. 1 by the Registry.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
June 01, 2011 ga
A.K. PATHAK, J.
Present: Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh and Mr. Jaswant Singh, Adv. for the petitioner.
Mr. M.K. Sethi, Adv. for respondent no.l.
Mr. Arvind Gupta, APP for the State-respondent no.2.
+ Crl. Rev. P. No. 152/2011
Petitioner has been convicted under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months; he was also directed to pay compensation of ?2 lakhs to the complainant (respondent no.l) and in default of payment of compensation to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment. Petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No. 138/2010 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi against his conviction. Sentence as awarded by the Trial Court was also challenged. By the order dated 22^^ February, 2011 Additional
Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as Appellate Court) has upheld the conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the
Act. However, sentence has been reduced to 1 month simple imprisonment. Compensation amount has also been reduced to
?1.50 lakh. Having remained dissatisfied by the order of the
Appellate Court, petitioner has approached this Court by way of
2011:DHC:19798
I present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section
401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, has given up challenge to the conviction of the petitioner on merits. He has prayed for leniency in the order on sentence. It is contended that petitioner is 52 years of age with no criminal antecedent. In case petitioner is sent to prison his whole family, comprising of ailing wife and mentally retarded child, shall immensely suffer. Having regard to the facts and circumstances that petitioner has to support his ailing wife and mentally retarded child, while upholding the conviction of the petitioner, his sentence of 1 month simple imprisonment is done away with while enhancing the compensation to ?1,65,000/-. A sum of ^15,000/- has been paid in cash by the petitioner to the counsel for respondent no. 1 in Court today. A sum of ?1,50,000/- has already been deposited in the Registry of this Court by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated l^t April, 2011. Let this amount of ^1,50,000/- together with interest accrued thereon be released to respondent no. 1 by the Registry.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
June 01, 2011 ga
A.K. PATHAK, J.
JUDGMENT