Delhi District Court
C.R. No. 109/19 Pradeep Gupta vs . Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar And Ors. on 20 May, 2019
C.R. No. 109/19 Pradeep Gupta Vs. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar and Ors.
IN THE COURT OF SH. MOHD. FARRUKH
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE05 (CENTRAL)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
C.R. No. 109/19
C.C. No. 9765/18
PS : Kotwali
IN THE MATTER OF :
Sh. Pradeep Gupta
S/o Sh. S.C. Gupta
R/o Shop No. 23, Lehna Singh Market
Malka Ganj, Subzi Mandi
Delhi110007 .........Revisionist
VERSUS
1. Sh. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar
S/o Sh. Mohan Chand Chugh
2. Smt. Shaloo
W/o Sh. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar
3. Smt. Aastha Chugh
D/o Sh. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar
4. Sh. Ansh Chugh
S/o Sh. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar
All resident of C4, Sector48
Noida, UP ...........Respondents
Date of Institution : 22.02.2019
Arguments heard on : 20.05.2019
Order pronounced on : 20.05.2019
JUDGEMENT
1. This is a revision petition U/s 397 Cr.P.C. filed against the order dated 12.09.2018 passed by the Court of Ld. MM, Delhi in complaint case number 1/5 C.R. No. 109/19 Pradeep Gupta Vs. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar and Ors. 9765/18 titled as Pradeep Gupta Vs. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar and Others. This revision petition is also accompanied by an application U/s 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the same. Notice of the revision petition was served to the respondents; trial court record has been requisitioned and perused.
2. Arguments have been heard on the application U/s 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay as well as on the revision petition from the respective Counsels.
3. Firstly, I would like to deal with the application for seeking condonation of delay in filing the present revision petition. The revisionist is assailing order dated 12.09.2018 passed by the Ld. Trial Court by way of the present revision petition filed by the petitioner on 22.02.2019. As per Article 131 of Schedule of Limitation Act, the limitation period for filing the revision petition under the Code of Civil Procedure and Code of Criminal Procedure is 90 days from the date of decree or order or sentencing sought to be revised. In the present case, present revision petition was filed on 22.02.2019 challenging the order dated 12.09.2018 and the same is beyond the period of 90 days as provided under Article 131 of the Schedule of Limitation Act. In the application U/s 5 of the Limitation Act, filed by the revisionist seeking condonation of delay in filing the present revision petition, it has been averred interalia that father of the 2/5 C.R. No. 109/19 Pradeep Gupta Vs. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar and Ors. revisionist was seriously ill and was suffering from various ailments and nobody was in the family to look after his ailing father and revisionist was only person to look after his ailing father. It is further averred that father of the revisionist was under regular treatment from October, 2018 and ultimately he expired on 08.01.2019. Thereafter, revisionist remained under shock and was not in a position to work properly and as such he could not file the revision petition in time. Hence, it is prayed that in the interest of justice, application seeking condonation of delay in filing revision petition may be allowed.
4. The said application has been vehemently opposed by Ld. Counsel for the respondents contending interalia that the petitioner has not given sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the present revision petition and there is inordinate delay in filing the same.
5. Perusal of the record reflects that petitioner has placed on record some medical documents in support of illness of his father, however, the said documents do not reflect that father of the petitioner was admitted in any hospital during the said period. Furthermore, even if it is presumed for the sake of arguments that the petitioner was looking after his ailing father, petitioner has failed to give any sufficient reason as to why the present revision petition had been filed on 22.02.2019 when his father expired on 08.01.2019. The present revision petition is liable to be dismissed on this score alone. 3/5 C.R. No. 109/19 Pradeep Gupta Vs. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar and Ors.
6. Now on merits, it is revealed that the petitioner has filed the complaint before Ld. MM against the respondents on the facts which stand noted in the impugned order dated 12.09.2018 and same are not required to be reproduced. However, suffice it to say that the allegation of the complainant before Ld. MM was that respondent Praveen Chugh had issued a cheque in his name showing to have been authorised by partnership firm i.e. 'Asha Fashions' of the petotioner despite the fact that the respondent Praveen Chugh was neither partner in the said firm nor authorised to issue the said cheque.
7. Admittedly, the cheque in question was never used by respondent or any other person making the partnership firm or the respondent liable for any civil or criminal action. The petitioner has claimed that an offence of cheating has been committed by the respondent Praveen Chugh as he has issued a cheque in favour of Maninder Singh Sethi. However, petitioner has failed to disclose as to how he has been cheated when admittedly, the said cheque has not been encashed and no one raised any claim against the petitioner on the strength of the said cheque. No wrongful loss has been caused to the petitioner.
8. Ld. MM has rightly observed that as per the complainant himself, the said cheque was not encashed and it is for the petitioner to show that respondent Praveen Chugh was not authorised to issue any cheque in the name of 'Asha Fashions.' It is rightly observed by Ld. MM that all the facts and circumstances of 4/5 C.R. No. 109/19 Pradeep Gupta Vs. Praveen Chugh @ Praveen Kumar and Ors. the case are within the knowledge of complainant and no investigation by the Police appears to be required and the application U/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was rightly dismissed.
9. In view of above, I find that there is no infirmity in the order dated 12.09.2018 passed by Ld. Trial Court. Hence, present revision petition is liable to be dismissed on both the counts i.e. it is barred by the limitation and is also devoid of any merit and, therefore, the same is accordingly dismissed. TCR be sent back along with copy of this order. Revision file be consigned to record room.
Announced in open Court on 20.05.2019 (Mohd. Farrukh) ASJ05 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (kg) 5/5