Full Text
Translation output
$-24 to 29 HIGH COURT OF DELHI (i) + CRL.REV.P.1099/2018 i& Crl.M.A.49174/2018&
Crl.M.A.4702/2019 (ii) + CRL.REV.P.1100/2018 & Crl.M.A.49176/2018&
Crl.M.A.4703/2019 (iii) + CRL.REV.P.1101/2018 i& CrI.M.A.49178/2018 «&
Crl.M.A.4701/2019 (iv) + CRL.REV.P.1102/2018 &CrI.M.A.49180/2018i&
CrI.M.A.4793/2019 (v) + CRL.REV.P.1103/2018 & Crl.M.A.49182/2018& r Crl.M.A.4794/2019
Crl.M.A.4702/2019 (ii) + CRL.REV.P.1100/2018 & Crl.M.A.49176/2018&
Crl.M.A.4703/2019 (iii) + CRL.REV.P.1101/2018 i& CrI.M.A.49178/2018 «&
Crl.M.A.4701/2019 (iv) + CRL.REV.P.1102/2018 &CrI.M.A.49180/2018i&
CrI.M.A.4793/2019 (v) + CRL.REV.P.1103/2018 & Crl.M.A.49182/2018& r Crl.M.A.4794/2019
CRL.REV.P.1104/2018 i& Crl.M.A.49184/2018&
Crl.M.A.4700/2019 GULSHAN Petitioner
Through: Mr.VishalRaj&Mr.Sunil Sagar, Advocates with petitioner in person
Crl.M.A.4700/2019 GULSHAN Petitioner
Through: Mr.VishalRaj&Mr.Sunil Sagar, Advocates with petitioner in person
VERSUS
M/S.INDIAN OVERSEAS CO.(P)LTD.&ANR. Respondents
^ Through: Mr.Chandan Goswami& Mr.Bhavesh Kumar Singh, Advocate with respondentNo.1 in person
Mr.M.S.Oberoi,Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentNo.2-
State
^ Through: Mr.Chandan Goswami& Mr.Bhavesh Kumar Singh, Advocate with respondentNo.1 in person
Mr.M.S.Oberoi,Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentNo.2-
State
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR Crl.Rev.P.1099/2018 ^ ^
Crl.Rev.P.1100/2018 . ^ Crl.Rev.P.1101/2018 ^ CrI.Rev.P.1102/2018
Crl.Rev.P.1103/2018 Crl.Rev.P.1104/2018 2019:DHC:7760
10.04.2019 In the above captioned petitions, challenge is to petitioner's conviction under Section 138 of.Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the sentence offine awarded to him in each ofthe six complaint cases.
During pendency ofthese petitions, reference was made to Delhi
High Court Mediation and Conciliation,where a mediated settlement has th been arrived at. In view of mediated settlement of 29 January, 2019, sentence offine awarded to petitioner stood inodified from ?90,000/- to
?80,000/- in Crl. Rev.P.1099/2018; from ?45,000/- to ?35,000/- in Crl.
Rev. P.l100/2018; from ^74,000/- to ?70,000/- , in Crl. Rev. P.
No.l101/2018;from ?90,000/-to ^80,000/-in Crl.Rev.P.1103/2018 and from ?85,000/-to ?95,000/-in Crl.Rev.P..1104/2018.
Petitioner's counsel submits thatin terms oforder of7^*^ December, 2018, demand draft of ^2,00,000/-had been placed on record and petitioner will get it revalidated and will hand it over to respondent- complainant with a week from today.
Registry is directed to return the demand draft of ^2,00,000/- to petitioner forthwith.
Petitioner's counsel submits on instmctions that petitioner could not arrange the settled amount and he could arrange ^80,000/- in cash, which has been tendered to respondent-complainant present in the Court, and he has accepted it. Petitioner's counsel submits that petitioner will
'V
Crl.Rev.P.1099/2018 Crl.Rev.P.1100/2018 Crl.Rev.P.1102/2018 pay the remaining settled amount of ^50,000/- within four weeks from today with interest@4.5% p.a.payable on the remaining settled amount of^50,000/-.
Letit be so done.
For the period of delay, interest amount of ?500/- has been tendered bypetitionertorespondent-complainant,whohasaccepted it.
These petitions and applications are accordingly disposed of in aforesaid terms.It is made clear in case petitioner defaults in complying with this order,then respondent-complainantshall be atlibertyto getthis order revoked.
Dasti.
APRIL 10,2019 r (SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Crl.Rev.P.1099/2018 ■
Crl.Rev.P.1100/2018 " Page3 Crl.Rev.P.1102/2018
Crl.Rev.P.1100/2018 . ^ Crl.Rev.P.1101/2018 ^ CrI.Rev.P.1102/2018
Crl.Rev.P.1103/2018 Crl.Rev.P.1104/2018 2019:DHC:7760
10.04.2019 In the above captioned petitions, challenge is to petitioner's conviction under Section 138 of.Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the sentence offine awarded to him in each ofthe six complaint cases.
During pendency ofthese petitions, reference was made to Delhi
High Court Mediation and Conciliation,where a mediated settlement has th been arrived at. In view of mediated settlement of 29 January, 2019, sentence offine awarded to petitioner stood inodified from ?90,000/- to
?80,000/- in Crl. Rev.P.1099/2018; from ?45,000/- to ?35,000/- in Crl.
Rev. P.l100/2018; from ^74,000/- to ?70,000/- , in Crl. Rev. P.
No.l101/2018;from ?90,000/-to ^80,000/-in Crl.Rev.P.1103/2018 and from ?85,000/-to ?95,000/-in Crl.Rev.P..1104/2018.
Petitioner's counsel submits thatin terms oforder of7^*^ December, 2018, demand draft of ^2,00,000/-had been placed on record and petitioner will get it revalidated and will hand it over to respondent- complainant with a week from today.
Registry is directed to return the demand draft of ^2,00,000/- to petitioner forthwith.
Petitioner's counsel submits on instmctions that petitioner could not arrange the settled amount and he could arrange ^80,000/- in cash, which has been tendered to respondent-complainant present in the Court, and he has accepted it. Petitioner's counsel submits that petitioner will
'V
Crl.Rev.P.1099/2018 Crl.Rev.P.1100/2018 Crl.Rev.P.1102/2018 pay the remaining settled amount of ^50,000/- within four weeks from today with interest@4.5% p.a.payable on the remaining settled amount of^50,000/-.
Letit be so done.
For the period of delay, interest amount of ?500/- has been tendered bypetitionertorespondent-complainant,whohasaccepted it.
These petitions and applications are accordingly disposed of in aforesaid terms.It is made clear in case petitioner defaults in complying with this order,then respondent-complainantshall be atlibertyto getthis order revoked.
Dasti.
APRIL 10,2019 r (SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Crl.Rev.P.1099/2018 ■
Crl.Rev.P.1100/2018 " Page3 Crl.Rev.P.1102/2018
JUDGMENT