Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51785 (CHH)

KHEDULAL YADAV v. MANOHAR TALREJA

CRR/1137/2025 · 2025-10-09

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:CGHC:50764 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1137 of 2025 Khedulal Yadav S/o Chandulal Yadav Aged About 56 Years Occupation- Peon, Public Works Department, G.E. Road, Rajnandgaon, Presently Posted In Old Rest House, Opposite Maharani Laxmi Bai School, Rajnandgaon R/o Next To Naya Dhaba Chowk, Dharmapur Road, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus Manohar Talreja S/o Mr. Indrajit Singh Talreja, R/o Lalbag, Street No. 02, Sindhi Colony, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Applicant : Shri Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate For Respondent : None appears ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 10.10.2025 1. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that although the applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NIA (Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881), however, no jail sentence has been awarded to the applicant, and the sentence awarded to him is, only to pay fine compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant, failing which he shall undergo SI for six months. Applicant’s appeal has been dismissed by the learned trial Court. 2. In the present Criminal Revision, application filed by the applicant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.09.2025. Thereafter, applicant has paid the entire amount of Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.10.28 10:54:26 +0530 Crr 1137 of 2025 2 compensation to the complainant, and he has been released from the jail. Now, the applicant does not want to press this petition any more. 3. On due consideration of above submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, present petition stands dismissed as not pressed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma