Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DAILYLAW 3254 (ALL)

SHREYA VIDYARTHI v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

CRLA/12182/2023 · 2026-05-05

Vani Ranjan Agrawal

Criminal Appealbody2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12182 of 2023 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J. 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant against the judgment and order dated 10.11.2023, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Additional Court II, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Complaint No.20333 of 2020, Vijay Bakshi Vs. Shreya Vidyarthi, arising out of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station- Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar. 2. Heard Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Vipin Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. By the impugned judgment, the respondent/accused was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine with a direction that in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment. 3. At the time of hearing of the appeal, learned counsel for both parties, fairly submitted that the appeal against the said judgment ought to have been filed before the Court of Sessions and that the present appeal before this Court is not maintainable. It has been jointly prayed that the present appeal be dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the competent Sessions Court. 4. This Court has considered the submissions made by learned counsels for the parties. In view of the nature of the impugned order and the statutory scale, governing appeals under the Negotiable Instruments Act, read with the Code Of Criminal Procedure., the present appeal is not maintainable before this Court. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable, however, a liberty is granted to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Aishwarya Pratap Singh, Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Sandeep Pandey, Urvashi Kunwar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Vipin Kumar Shreya Vidyarthi .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) competent court of sessions in accordance with law. 6. It is further directed that if such an appeal is filed within a reasonable period, the same shall be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. May 6, 2026 P. Pandey CRLA No. 12182 of 2023 2 (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad