1 / 4 2025:CGHC:4315 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 962 of 2024 1 - G. Venket Raman S/o Chenna Padu Aged About 43 Years R/o Near Old Kali Grocery Shop, Infront Of Prasad Rao Colony, P.S. Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, Second Address Balaji, Egg Sales, P.S.Torwa, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - Rajkumar Agrawal S/o Late Jagdish Agrawal Aged About 44 Years R/o Krishna Vihar, House No. 102, Vidya Nagar, P.S.Tarbahar, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 23/01/2025 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. The instant criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 14/08/2024 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, C.G. in criminal appeal No.30/2024 arising out of order dated 27/01/2024 passed by the JMFC, Bilaspur in complaint case No.677/2019, whereby the Sessions Court affirmed the ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.01.25 12:04:50 +0530 2 / 4 order passed by the trial Court and maintained the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced the applicant to undergo R.I. for six months and to fine amount of Rs.8,50,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount directed to undergo three months R.I. 3. The brief facts of this case are that the respondent filed a complaint under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 against the applicant alleging that in the month of December 2018 the applicant demanded Rs. 8 lacs from him, which was given by respondent through 3 cheques in the month of January 2019 and for returning the said debt, applicant had given a cheque no. 019026 dated 19.06.2019 of Rs. 8 lacs to the respondent of his bank account in Chhattisgarh State Gramin Bank, Branch Bilaspur. When the respondent presented the said cheque for withdrawal of the amount in his I.O.B. Bank Bilaspur on 20.06.2019, the same was returned on 21.06.2019 with an endorsement that there is no sufficient balance in the account and thereby the cheque was dishonored. The respondent further alleged that he sent a legal notice for demand of the said amount and thereafter when the amount was not returned back to him, he instituted the instant complaint before the court below. During trial respondent recorded his statements and also exhibited certain documents thereafter statement of applicant was recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C. but did not lead any witness in his support and thereafter the learned court below convicted the applicant on 27.01.2024 under section 138 of N.I. Act imposing R.I. of 6 months and also imposed fine of Rs. 8,50,000/- under section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. with 3 / 4 default stipulation. Against the said judgment dated 27.01.2024 of conviction, applicant preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge, District Bilaspur which was later on transferred for adjudication before the court of First Additional Session Judge Bilaspur. The learned appellate court after hearing both the parties and after going through the material available on record, maintained the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court and rejected the appeal of the applicant. Hence this revision. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that an amount of Rs.8,10,000/- has already been deposited by the accused/applicant before the trial Court and the applicant has also suffered the jail sentence from 14/08/2024 to 06/09/2024, therefore, it is prayed that the revision may be allowed and the impugned judgment dated 14/08/2024 may be set aside and the applicant may be acquitted from the charges under Section 138 N.I. Act. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent do not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and she prays for disbursal of the fine amount. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. As far as the conviction of the applicant is concerned, there is cogent reason mentioned by the trial Court as well as the First Appellate court and both the Courts below have rightly convicted the accused under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, however, so far as the sentence part is concerned, considering the fact that the applicant has already undergone 23 days of jail sentence as the Sessions Judge has affirmed the 4 / 4 conviction and sentence of the applicant awarded by the trial Court in Criminal Case No.30/2024 and bail was granted to him by this Court only on 06/09/2024, there would be no useful purpose to send the applicant again in jail as he has already suffered jail sentence and also agony of criminal trial for many years, that meets the ends of justice. So this Court finds it appropriate to reduce the sentence from RI for six months under Section 138 of the N.I. Act to the period already undergone by him i.e. 23 days of jail sentence but the sentence with regard to payment of fine amount is affirmed. It is admitted fact that the trial Court has imposed fine of Rs.8,10,000/-, out of which the applicant has already deposited Rs.8,10,000/- before the trial Court, therefore, rest of the fine amount of Rs.40,000/- shall be deposited by the applicant within a period of one month from today before the concerned trial Court and the same shall be paid to respondent/complainant. If the fine amount is not deposited by the applicant within the stipulated time, he shall further undergo as has been ordered by the appellate Court. Ordered accordingly. 8. The criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein- above. Consequently, all the pending interloucatory applications, if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu