Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32890 (CHH)

SPICE BANGLA RESTAURANT HOTEL v. SMT. SMRITI PRASAD

CRMP/1086/2022 · 2026-08-12

Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010208482022 2026:CGHC:36099 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1086 of 2022 1. Spice Bangla Restaurant Hotel Through Proprietor Smt. Shivani Mukherjee Wife Of Sumant Mukherjee, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ahead Of I.C.I.C.I, Bank, Torwa, Tahsil and District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2. Smt. Shivani Mukherjee W/o Sumant Mukherjee Aged About 32 Years R/o Shikshak Colony Uslapur , Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgah ... Petitioner(s) versus Smt. Smriti Prasad W/o Ranjan Prasad Aged About 36 Years R/o Shikshak Colony Uslapur, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : None Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 13/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 21.03.2021 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 2224/2021 wherein learned trial court has allowed the application filed by the complainant under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the cheque amount, as well as order dated 01.06.2022 passed by 8th Additional Sessions Judge Raipur, Bilaspur (C.G.) by which the criminal revision filed by the petitioner has been rejected. SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2026.08.14 11:10:32 +0530 2 2. From bare perusal of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rakesh Ranjan Shrivastava vs. State of Jharkhan and Another {(2024) 4 SCC 419}, it is quite vivid that the depositing of amount is mandatory however, so far as the quantum is concerned, it is discretionary. 3. Considering this aspect of the matter, interim order passed by this Court on 27.02.2023 shall stands vacated to the extent the petitioner is directed to deposit the amount as directed by the trial Court in Complaint Case No. 2224/2021 decided on 21.03.2021 and the said amount shall not be disbursed to the complainant. 4. With this direction, the instant CrMP disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge santosh