HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4325 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Agra. By the said order dated 29.07.2024, the appeal of the revisionist has been dismissed and the revisionist has been directed to comply with the order passed by the Additional Court No.3, Agra vide order dated 12.10.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that he has already paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/-, which was taken as a loan and the story as submitted by the opposite party no.2 is false and baseless and the complaint in question was filed in order to harass the revisionist, who is an old age person and is also financially and economically poor. He prayed that the order passed in appeal dated 29.07.2024 be quashed and set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 submitted that the order passed by the Additional court dated 12.10.2023 is based on evidence and the same is in accordance with law, as there was liability against the revisionist aggregating to sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- and in lieu thereof, the revisionist has given a cheque of the said amount to opposite party no.2. The learned Additional court after taking into consideration the defence submitted by the revisionist has passed a detailed and speaking order against which the appeal filed by the Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Akhil Yadav, Amit Kumar Agrahari, Nandini Bhartiya, Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jai Raj Chandrashekhar .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) revisionist has also been dismissed. He further submits that amount due, was directed to be paid to opposite party no.2, has not yet been paid by the revisionist. It is next submitted that the revisionist failed to point out any illegality in the said order passed in appeal dated 29.07.2024 and prayed that the revision is liable to be dismissed. 5. Having regard to the contentions raised on behalf of the parties, it has been accepted by the revisionist that, the said cheque was given as a guarantor and not as a liability as submitted by the opposite party no.2 and, therefore, if there is no liability, the revisionist is not accountable or liable to pay any amount, whatsoever as has been directed to be paid by the learned Additional Court No.3 vide order dated 12.10.2023. Even if, it is presumed that, there was no direct liability, but the revisionist by his own admission stood as a guarantor in respect of the said transaction, and therefore, it cannot be presumed or believed that the revisionist was not liable to pay any amount on account of failure of said payment, which was due upon the revisionist and, hence, the revisionist cannot be absolved of the liability during the course of transaction that has taken place between the revisionist and opposite party no.2. It has further been brought to the notice of this Court that the revisionist had not shown any bona-fide, as much as the revisionist did not seek regular bail before the appellate court and is agitating against the payment of amount of Rs. 1,81,500/- as directed to be paid by the Additional Court No.3, Agra. 6. Under such circumstances, the present revision is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed. 7. It shall remain open to the opposite party no.2 to take appropriate steps, as provided under law in getting the money recovered, as due upon the revisionist. September 18, 2025 Mini CRLR No. 4325 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad