Jaspal Singh Alagh vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 24 August, 2020

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Jaspal Singh Alagh vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 24 August, 2020

Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani

                                                    via Video-conferencing

$~23 & 24
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+    CRL. REV. P. 275/2020
     JASPAL SINGH ALAGH                   ..... Petitioner
                      Through:  Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate
                               with Mr. Mohit Khanna, Advocate.
                      Versus

      STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.                  .... Respondents
                       Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for the
                                State.
                                Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Senior Advocate
                                with Ms. Aruna Tiku, Advocate and
                                Mr. Lokesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for
                                respondent No.2.
+     CRL. REV. P. 276/2020
      JASPAL SINGH ALAGH                    ..... Petitioner
                       Through:  Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate
                                with Mr. Mohit Khanna, Advocate.
                       Versus

      STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.              .... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for the
                               State.
                               Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Senior Advocate
                               with Ms. Aruna Tiku, Advocate and
                               Mr. Lokesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for
                               respondent No.2.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
                    ORDER

% 24.08.2020 Crl. M.A. Nos.11497-498/2020 (exemption) in Crl. Rev. P.275/2020 Crl. M.A. Nos.11499-500/2020 (exemption) in Crl. Rev. P.276/2020 Exemptions are granted, subject to just exceptions and subject to the petitioner completing all requirements of filing certified, true Crl. Rev. P.275/2020 & 276/2020 Page 1 of 4 typed, properly margined copies of annexures and documents and attested affidavits within 10 days of physical re-opening of the court.

Applications stand disposed of.

Crl. Rev. P. 275/2020 & Crl. Rev. P. 276/2020 The petitioner, who was accused in two criminal complaints filed by respondent No.2/complainant under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, was convicted vidé two judgments dated 12.11.2018 and sentenced vidé two sentencing orders dated 29.11.2018 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. The complaint in one case was with regard to 03 cheques, two being for Rs.3 lacs each and one being for Rs.4 lacs, issued in favour of the sole proprietorship firm of respondent No.2. The complaint in the second case was with regard to a cheque for Rs.7.50 lacs, issued in favour of the sole proprietorship firm of respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner filed two appeals, being C.A Nos.179/2018 and 180/2018, impugning the two sets of judgments and sentencing orders, which appeals have now been dismissed vidé judgments dated 10.08.2020 by the learned Sessions Judge, thereby upholding the conviction in both cases.

3. By way of the present revision petitions under sections 379/401/482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner impugns judgments dated 10.08.2020 in the two appeals.

4. Mr. Mohit Mathur, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that, without dwelling into the contradictions and Crl. Rev. P.275/2020 & 276/2020 Page 2 of 4 discrepancies that have come through in the evidence during trial, even the originals of certain material and relevant documents were not produced before the learned Trial Court; and yet the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court have proceeded on the basis only of the presumption in section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

5. Issue notice in both petitions.

6. Mr. Tarang Srivastava, learned APP appears for respondent no.

1/State on advance copy; and submits that the State is merely a pro-forma party since these were private complaints.

7. Mr. Rakesh Tiku, learned senior counsel appears for respondent No.2/complainant on advance copy; accepts notice; and disputes that requisite originals were not produced. Mr. Tiku submits that there are two concurrent findings of fact, which ought not to be interfered with in the revisional jurisdiction of this court.

8. Let trial court records in both cases be requisitioned in electronic form, for the next date.

9. List on 13th October 2020.

Crl. M.(B) No.7889/2020 (for suspension of sentence) in Crl. Rev. P. 275/2020 Crl. M.(B) No.7890/2020 (for suspension of sentence) in Crl. Rev. P. 276/2020

10. By way of the aforesaid sentencing orders, the petitioner has been sentenced to simple imprisonment of 01 year in each case;

Crl. Rev. P.275/2020 & 276/2020 Page 3 of 4

a total fine of Rs.35 lacs in both cases; with default sentence of 03 months in each case. Mr. Mathur submits that a sum of Rs.7 lacs has already been deposited before the Trial Court.

11. Issue notice.

12. Mr. Tarang Srivastava, learned APP appears for respondent no.

1/State on advance copy; and submits that the State is merely a pro-forma party since it was a private complaint.

13. Mr. Rakesh Tiku, learned senior counsel appears for respondent No.2/complainant on advance copy; accepts notice; and seeks time to file reply.

14. Let reply be filed before the next date, with advance copy to the opposing counsel.

15. Subject to the petitioner depositing an additional sum of Rs.13 lacs with the Registrar General of this court within 10 days, operation of the sentences in both cases, as upheld by the impugned judgments, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.

16. List on 13th October 2020.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J AUGUST 24, 2020 Ne Crl. Rev. P.275/2020 & 276/2020 Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders