[2025:RJ-JP:47972] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6750/2025 M/s Prufex Packeging Private Limited, Through Director Authorized Representative Dayaram Bhidhuri, Resident Of J- 1042, Riico Industrial Area, Bhiwadi Tehsil Tijara District Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus M/s Shri Hari Ji Traders, Jaye Proprietor Smt. Shalini Agarwal Wife Of Shri R/o Ishwar Goyal, R/o 1/1541 Nasrovar Park, Shahdara, Delhi- 110032 And Through C-10, 1538, Mansarovar Park, Shahdara, Delhi- 110032. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Raj Kumar Kasana For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 26/11/2025 1. With a limited prayer and purpose, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition seeking issuance of directions to the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhiwadi, District Alwar (for short, ‘the Appellate Court) to decide the Criminal Appeal No.6/2023 filed by the respondent expeditiously within a fixed time frame. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the accused-respondent before the Court of Judicial Magistrate Bhiwadi, District Alwar wherein, after the trial, the respondent was found guilty vide judgment dated [2025:RJ-JP:47972] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6750/2025] 19.12.2019 and was punished with simple imprisonment of six months with fine of Rs.10,00,000/-. 4. Counsel submits that aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the accused-respondent has preferred an appeal before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Bhiwadi wherein vide order dated 27.01.2020, the sentence has been suspended. However, after passing of almost five years, till date, the appeal has not been decided. Therefore, appropriate directions be issued to the Appellate Court to decide the appeal expeditiously as early as possible, within a fixed time frame. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by counsel for the complainant-petitioner and looking to the fact that against the judgment dated 19.12.2019, an appeal has been preferred by the accused-respondent before the Appellate Court almost five years ago, but till date, the same is lying pending for its adjudication on merits. 6. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of with the expectation from the Appellate Court to make all possible endeavours to decide the pending appeal expeditiously, as early as possible, after hearing the accused-respondent. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /48