Bombay High Court
Thadaram S/O. Sitaldas Chawla vs Indirabai W/O. Narayandas Parwani on 21 September, 2018
Author: Nitin W. Sambre
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre
revn184.18+1.odt
1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRI. REVN. APPLN. (REVN.) NO. 184 OF 2018
Thadaram Sitaldas Chawla
-Vs.-
Narayandas Lekhumal Parwani and another
CRI. REVN. APPLN. (REVN.) NO. 185 OF 2018
Thadaram Sitaldas Chawla
-Vs.-
Indirabai w/o Narayandas Parwani and another
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. O.S.Harmani, counsel for the applicant.
Mr. T.A.Mirza, APP for the respondent No.2.
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
DATE : 21.09.2018.
The applicant is convicted for an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which is confirmed in an appeal.
The applicant is claiming that he is innocent and the presumption of holding of cheque for lawful debt is not discharged by the complainant.
ADMIT.
The learned APP waives notice of hearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.
Paper book be filed within a period of six months from today, failing which the revision shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.
KHUNTE ::: Uploaded on - 24/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/09/2018 00:57:38 ::: revn184.18+1.odt 2/2 CRI. APPLN. (APPR) NO. 306 & 307 OF 2018 In both these applications the applicant was called upon to deposit the amount of compensation pursuant to the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Dilip S. Dahanukar v. Kotak Mahindra Co.Ltd., reported in (2007) 6 SCC 528. The fact remains that the applicant has not deposited a single pai of compensation/fine amount. The only explanation coming forward from the applicant is that he is old aged and not keeping well.
Considering the conduct of the present applicant who is convicted and not intending to pay an amount of compensation/fine amount till date, it would appropriate in my opinion to reject the prayer for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Accordingly, he be immediately committed to the prison pursuant to the order of the conviction. Both the applications are dismissed.
Liberty to apply in case the applicant deposits the amount of compensation.
JUDGE KHUNTE ::: Uploaded on - 24/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 25/09/2018 00:57:38 :::