1 2025:CGHC:42774 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 910 of 2014 Vipin Kumar Dewangan S/o Late Kailash Dewangan Aged About 24 Years R/o Mathpara, Near Manglin Wood Depot, Durg, P.S. City P.S. Distt. and Tah. Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1. Ku. Sangeeta Dewangan D/o Shankarlal Aged About 38 Years R/o Mathpara, Near Manglin Wood Depot, Durg, P.S. City P.S. District and Tah. Durg, Chhattisgarh 2. State of Chhhattisgarh through Collector, Durg, District and Tahsil – Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Rudra Nath, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Ms. Sunita Jain, Advocate. For Respondent No.2/State: Ms. Vaisahli Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.08.2025 1. This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 11.11.2014 passed by the learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in Criminal Appeal No. 0000060/2013, arising out of the judgment and order dated 13.03.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Durg (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 571/2011, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.08.26 18:52:22 +0530 2 whereby the applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000/- within 2 months, in default of payment, 3 months simple imprisonment in addition. 2. According to the prosecution's case, the applicant had taken a loan of Rs. 23,000/- from the complainant. To repay the said amount, the applicant issued a cheque bearing number 752709, drawn on bank account number 63023655748 of the State Bank of Indore, dated 15/12/2010. However, the date 15/12/2010 was struck off and replaced with 04/03/2010. The complainant deposited the cheque at Allahabad Bank, Durg. On 26/07/2010, the bank informed the complainant that the account had been closed, and thus the cheque was dishonoured. Subsequently, on 28/07/2010, the complainant served a legal notice on the applicant, which went unanswered. Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint case against the applicant. The applicant has deposited an amount of Rs. 8,750/- out of the total Rs. 35,000/- and has also undergone the prescribed imprisonment. 3. The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been convicted and sentenced till the arising of the Court and further compensation amount of Rs. 30,000/- was directed to be deposited within a period two months and stated that out of same, the applicant has deposited amount of Rs. 8,750/-. He further undertakes to deposit the balance amount within a period of two months, failing which the 3 applicant shall undergo the sentence as has been awarded by the trial Court. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 would strongly supports the impugned judgment. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgments of both the Courts and records of the trial Court with utmost circumspection. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that the trial Court after considering the materials available on record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses, has convicted the applicant for offences punishable under Sections 138 of the NI Act and sentenced him to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000/- under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C. In the revision preferred by the applicant, the appellate Court has maintained the conviction of the applicant. Considering the materials available on record and the evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am of the view that the trial Court and the appellate Court have not committed any illegality or infirmity in affirming the conviction of the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 138 of the NI Act. 7 It transpires from the record that the applicant has convicted for offence punishable under Sections 138 of the NI Act and sentenced him to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000/- under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C, and the applicant has deposited only amount of Rs. 8,750/- and with regard to the balance amount, he undertakes to deposit the same within a period of two 4 months from today, failing which he shall undergo the sentence as has been awarded by the trial Court. 8 However, the complainant/respondent No.1 is at liberty to move an appropriate application before the trial Court concerned for withdrawing the said balance compensation amount. 9 Accordingly, the criminal revision is disposed of to the extent indicated herein-above. 10. Let a copy of this order and the original records be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti