Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8409 (UTT)

KAFEEL AHMAD v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

CRLR/273/2020 · 2025-09-11

Alok Mahra

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:8108 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CRLR No.273 of 2020 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. There is no representation for the revisionist. Mr. B.N. Molakhi, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent no.1. 2. This Criminal Revision has been filed challenging the judgment & order dated 19.03.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal in Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2020. Revisionist has also challenged the order dated 17.06.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal in Criminal Case No.1178 of 2017. 3. Earlier a complaint was lodged against the applicant by the respondent no.2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Thereafter, matter was investigated and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal vide order dated 17.06.2019 convicted the revisionist under Section 138 of N.I. Act and directed him to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of ₹4,10,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to undergo one month’s additional simple imprisonment. Against the said order, revisionist filed Criminal Appeal. Though, the said Criminal Appeal has been partly allowed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal and the 2025:UHC:8108 order of conviction and sentence passed by learned A.C.J.M. is confirmed, but the fine amount was reduced to ₹2,90,800/-. 4. After hearing the leaned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, it is established by documentary evidence that the revisionist has paid the consideration of sale deed by the cheques, which were dishonoured, thus, the ingredients of Section 138 of N.I. Act are fully made out against the revisionist. This Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment & order dated 19.03.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2020, therefore, the Criminal Revision is dismissed. (Alok Mahra, J.) 11.09.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb73933 98f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB987446351E 4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2025.09.12 16:59:03 +05'30'