TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Revision petition dismissed for non-surrender of accused in Section 138 NI Act case.</h1> <h3>Ramesh Kumar Sharma Versus Subhash Chand Gupta</h3> Ramesh Kumar Sharma Versus Subhash Chand Gupta - TMI Issues involved: Revision petition u/s 397 read with 401 CrPC against order of conviction and sentence for offence u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Maintainability of revision petition due to non-surrender of accused before Appellate Court.Details of the judgment:Issue 1: Conviction and sentence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881The accused petitioner filed a revision petition against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the First Appellate Court. The complaint alleged that the accused issued a cheque which bounced due to insufficient funds. The non-petitioner filed a criminal complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the Court took cognizance. The non-petitioner provided evidence, and the petitioner denied issuing the cheque but did not present any defense. The Trial Court convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to 6 months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge.Issue 2: Maintainability of revision petitionThe petitioner did not surrender before the Appellate Court at the time of judgment pronouncement, as required by law. The Trial Court has the power to suspend the sentence for one month under Section 389(3) CrPC if the convicted person intends to appeal. However, the Appellate Court does not have the discretion to suspend the sentence during the pendency of appeal. In this case, since the accused did not surrender and the revision petition was filed without the required certificate of custody, it was held that the revision petition was not maintainable. The High Court ruled that the revision petition deserves to be dismissed due to the non-surrender of the accused and the absence of the required certificate of custody.Therefore, the High Court dismissed the revision petition and the stay application was also disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 