1 CGHC010021202014 2026:CGHC:35613 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 66 of 2014 Markandey Sharma Proprietor M/s. Sharma Body Builders, Through Sandeep Roadlines, Post Gondwara, Near Realiance Petrol Pump, Ring Road No. 5, P.S. Khamtarai, Tah. Raipur, Rev. And Civil District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - Ashok Leyland Finance Ltd. Regtd. Under Indian Co. Act, Having Its Office At 1st Floor, Babla Complex, G.E. Road, Tah. Raipur, Rev. And Civil District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Raipur, Rev. And Civil District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ashish Surana, Advocate. For Respondent No.2/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.08.2026 1. This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 17.12.2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No.46/2011 by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.), arising out of the judgment of conviction dated 12.01.2011 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, District – Raipur (C.G.) passed in Complaint Case No. 904/2008, wherein the applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (in short ‘NI Act’) and sentenced to pay fine amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- and in RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 default of payment of fine amount additional simple imprisonment for 03 months. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is that the complainant has proved the financial loan unto the applicant for the purchase of vehicle (Truck), for which the applicant has issued a cheque of Dena Bank, Branch, Industrial Area Raipur, for a sum of Rs. 8,89,955/- as a security unto the loan amount to the ocmplainant and when the aforesaid cheque was presented by the complainant in the Induslnd Bank Limited, Branch – Raipur, for realization of the sum, then the aforesaid cheque was dishonoured on 04.03.2008, with the noting as “Insufficient Amount”. The complainant on 10.03.2008, has issued a legal notice unto the applicant, which was received by the applicant on 17.03.2008. Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 138 of the NI Act. The learend trial Court has framed charge under Section 138 of the NI Act, and then after the conclusion of the trial, the applicant sentenced to 1 year of rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default in payment of fine amount, additional rigorous imprisonment of 1 year. Being aggrieved by the sentence passed by learned trial Court, the applicant herein has filed an appeal before the appellate Court, and the learned appellate Court has partly allowed the appeal and modified the sentence into compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- to be paid by the applicant to the complainant/respondent No.1, under Section 357(3) of the CrPC. Hence, this revision. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned appellate Court has failed to consider the material on record and thus, the 3 applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act. He further submits that the appellate Court has imposed the amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- upon the applicant, but the same has not been paid. Learned counsel emphasized that sentence may be modified suitably as the applicant shall deposit the said amount. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the respondent, would strongly support the impugned judgment of conviction and submit that there is no need to interfere with the sentence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the records and judgments of the trial Court and appellate Court with utmost circumspection. 6. From perusal of the judgments of the trial Court and the appellate Court, it transpires that the applicant was initially convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the trial Court, whereby the applicant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 01 year and directed to pay fine amount of Rs. 10,000/- in default of payment of fine, further SI for one year. Subsequently, being aggrieved by the order of conviction, the applicant preferred an appeal, whereby the appellate Court partly allowed the appeal and sentenced him to under go till rising of the Court and directed the applicant to deposit Rs. 3,50,000/-, in default of payment of fine, 03 months of simple imprisonment. 7. I am of the view that the learned appellate Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity by imposing a fine amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- for the 4 offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, in default of payment of fine amount 03 months of simple imprisonment. 8. Now, considering the question of sentence, on a pointed query made to the learned counsel for the applicant as to whether he is willing to pay the remaining fine amount or not, he submits that the applicant is ready to pay the fine amount imposed by the learned Appellate Court and prays for some time to do so. 9. Accordingly, it is directed that the applicant shall deposit the fine amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- imposed upon him by the learned appellate Court within a period of two months from today, in default of payment within the stipulated time, the applicant shall undergo the sentence as has been awarded by the learned Appellate Court. 10. On deposit of the said amount by the applicant, the same shall be disbursed to the respondent No.1/complainant without delay. 11. With the aforesaid directions, the criminal revision stands disposed of. 12. 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 Rajshekhar