Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Choubey vs Nishant Pandey on 9 October, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR CRR No. 3817 of 2023 (SUNIL CHOUBEY Vs NISHANT PANDEY) Dated : 09-10-2023 Shri Sankalp Kochar - Advocate for the applicant.
Heard on admission.
The revision being arguable is admitted for hearing. Also heard on I.A. No.20303/2023, which is first application filed under section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
The applicant has been convicted by the appellate Court under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months with compensation of Rs.11,63,015/-, with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the trial Court has n o t properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record. Maximum sentence awarded to the applicant is six months RI. The final disposal of this revision will take considerable time, therefore, the jail sentence of the applicant may be suspended and he may be released on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the records and the judgments of the courts below.
I n this application for suspension of sentence, learned counsel for the applicant has made submission that a part of the compensation amount has already been deposited by the applicant and that there was a substantial delay in filing the complaint without giving any satisfactory reason.
In the light of the provision of Section 142(b) of Negotiable Instruments Act, the ground of delay in filing the complaint cannot be taken now as a 2 ground for suspension of sentence. It has also been argued that questioned cheque was manipulated as there was overwriting but perusal of cheque shows that there is no overwriting in the details regarding the name of drawee, the amount of cheque and the date of drawing the cheque. Any other correction in the cheque is immaterial.
The order passed in the case of Dilip Mahajan vs. Kapil Patel, passed in CRR No.3570 of 2022 dated 24.4.2023, Devendra Singh vs. Vipin Soni, passed in CRR No.2505 of 2022 dated 12.7.2022, Jaypal Singh vs. State of M.P., passed CRR No.1786/2020 dated 22.7.2020 and Surendra Kumar Sharma vs. Smt. Vaishali, passed in CRR No.3792/2022 dated 30.9.2022 have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant but these orders do not lay down any principle of law to have a binding effect as a ratio.
Taking into consideration the fact that prima facie there is no legal or factual ground to order the suspension of sentence, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the sentence passed by the courts below.
Accordingly, I.A. No.20303/2023 is dismissed. List the matter for final hearing in due course.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE ps Digitally signed by PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Date: 2023.10.11 15:56:14 +05'30' Adobe Reader version: 11.0.8