Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ltc Export India Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 October, 2021
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5504/2021
Ltc Export India Pvt. Ltd., Through Premnarayan Kabra S/o Late
Shri Bishabhradayal, Age About 82 Years, R/o Vile Parle, West
Mumbai, (Maharashtra)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. M/s Fatehlal Chandmal And Sons, Through Shri Vikas
Maru S/o Late Shri Hastimal Maru, Aged About 38, R/o
Fatehnagar Teh. Mavli, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tushar Moad
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Order 06/10/2021
1. The petitioner has preferred this miscellaneous petition being aggrieved by the order dated 23.9.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mavli, District Udaipur whereby the learned Magistrate has ordered for the personal appearance of the petitioner.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is 82 years of age and his appearance could have been marked by the Court on the virtual platform. It is further contended that even if the petitioner stands convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act, he is entitled to have his sentence suspended under the provisions of Section 389 of Cr.P.C.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the contention. (Downloaded on 06/10/2021 at 08:44:26 PM)
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-5504/2021]
4. It is contended that at the time when the bail bonds are furnished there is a condition that the accused petitioner will appear on all dates and as and when called by the Court. It is further contended that the matter is listed for pronouncement of judgment and presence of the accused is required when the judgment is pronounced. It is further contended that even if the sentence is suspended, the accused is required to furnish bail bonds and for that his presence before the court is required.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. The cheque dishonour complaints are pending since 2013 and now the matter is listed for pronouncement of the judgment. The presence of the accused is required at the time of pronouncement of judgment, hence the impugned order cannot be said to be contrary to law.
7. No ground is made our for exercising inherent powers. The miscellaneous petition is dismissed.
8. The stay application stands disposed of.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J ns. 32-1/-
(Downloaded on 06/10/2021 at 08:44:26 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)