ARJUN KUMAR JAISWAL @ ARJUN KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER
/2071/2025 · 2025-12-08
Brij Raj Singh
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 199528 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 199528 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2071 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed seeking setting aside the order dated 04.10.2025 passed by the In-charge Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh on Application U/s 389(1) Cr.P.C. and 430 BNSS, 2023 in Criminal Appeal No.84 of 2025, Arjun Kumar Jaiswal Vs. State of U.P. and another and the order dated 06.09.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lalganj, Pratapgarh in Complaint Case No.571 of 2025, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh
3. The sole argument of counsel for the applicant is that while exercising power under Section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the court has not recorded its reasons and has passed the order for depositing 20% of the total amount of the compensation. He further submits that the order passed by the trial court is faulty on that ground. He has not pressed any other ground.
4. After going through the record, I find that appeal has been admitted against the conviction by the appellate court and the court has also taken due consideration of Section 148 of N.I. Act and the appeal has been entertained to the effect that applicant has to deposit 20% of the total amount of the compensation as per the statutory provision. In my opinion, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Taufiq Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Arjun Kumar Jaiswal @ Arjun Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the appellate court.
5. Application is devoid of merit. It is accordingly rejected. December 8, 2025 Rao/- NA528 No. 2071 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench