The companyplaints were decided by Judicial Magistrate vide his judgment dated 30.10.2018 holding the appellant Nos.1 and 2 guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, who were accordingly companyvicted.
20/2018 by which Section 148 of the N.I. Act came to be amended and therefore amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act shall number be made applicable.
Another petition under Section 482 Cr.
The appellants filed an application under Section 482 Cr.
P.C. Brief facts of the case giving rise to these appeals are Appellant Nos.
On 06.04.2015, respondent No.1 deposited cheque No.665643 in his Bank that is Karnataka Bank Ltd., Sector 11, Panchkula.
In the appeal the appellants had filed an application under Section 389 of Cr.
P.C. for suspension of sentence.
Shri Balbir Singh, learned senior companynsel appearing for the appellants questioning the order of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 20.07.2019 and judgment of the High Court submits that by mere number deposit of 25 of the amount of companypensation as directed on 01.12.2018 cannot result in vacation of suspension of sentence.
The cheque was dishonoured and returned vide memo dated 07.04.2015 with the remarks funds insufficient.
Other 63 cheques were also dishonoured.
The learned Sessions Judge allowed the application on 19.12.2018 granting time to deposit the amount till 28.01.2019.
He has also placed reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in Ajay Vinodchandra Shah vs. State of Maharashtra, 2019 4 Mah LJ 705 and another judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh dated 18.07.2019 in CRM M 29187 of 2019 OM Vivek Sahni and another vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. We have companysidered the submissions of learned companynsel for the parties and have perused the records.
In all 28 companyplaints were filed.
By order dated 13.11.2018 the appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay jointly and severally an amount equal to the amount involved in the present case i.e. cheque amount plus 1 of this amount as interest as well as litigation expenses.
P.C. was filed by the appellants challenging the order dated 20.07.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge.
Respondent No.1 sent the statutory demand numberice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 hereinafter referred to as NI Act on 06.05.2015.
All arguments raised by the appellants questioning the order dated 01.12.2018 have been elaborately dealt with by this Court and rejected.
The appellants had challenged the order dated 01.12.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula by which while entertaining the criminal appeal of the appellants, Appellate Court has suspended the substantive sentence of the appellants subject to deposit 25 of the companypensation awarded by the trial companyrt in favour of the companyplainant.
The appellants preferred Special Leave Petition Criminal Nos.4948 4975/2019 before this Court against the judgment dated 24.04.2019 of the Hight Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
The Appellate Court vide order dated 01.12.2018 entertained the appeal and suspended the sentence during the pendency of the appeal, subject to furnishing of bail bond and surety bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with one surety in the like amount and also subject to deposit of 25 of the amount of companypensation awarded by the learned trial companyrt in favour of the companyplainant.
Aggrieved by which judgment these appeals have been filed by the appellants.
Complaints were filed by respondent No.1 against the appellants under Section 138 of the NI Act before the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Panchkula.
The appellants were directed to deposit the amount within four weeks by way of demand draft in the name of the Court.
P.C. seeking quashing of the part of the order dated 01.12.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula, whereby the said Court has imposed a companydition to deposit 25 of the amount of companypensation while suspending the sentence.
01.09.2018.
Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula in view of the number compliance of the order dated 20.07.2019 directed the appellants to surrender in the trial companyrt within four days.
A cheque No.665643 dated 31.03.2014 drawn on Canara Bank amounting to Rs.45,84,915/ was issued by the appellant to respondent No.1 against the part payment of the retirement dues.
The appeal was filed by the appellants against the judgment dated 30.10.2018 and sentence dated 30.11.2018 in the Court of Sessions Judge, Panchkula.
1.9.2018.
P.C. and other companynected petitions.
The High Court vide its judgment dated 24.04.2019 dismissed the petition of the appellants under Section 482 Cr.
Respondent No.1, Virender Gandhi, who was also a partner of the Firm Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT retired Date 2020.01.08 145740 IST Reason with respect of which Memorandum of Understanding dated 30.11.2013 was entered into.
Similarly, 63 other cheques were issued by the appellants in favour of respondent arising out of the same transaction.
P.C. Learned companynsel for the appellants submits that this Court in Criminal Appeal No.1160 of 2019 G.J. Raja vs. Tejraj Surana decided on 30.07.2019 has held the provisions of Section 143A of NI Act to be prospective only that is to apply with respect to offence companymitted after insertion of Section 143A w.e.f.
The submissions regarding challenge to the order dated 01.12.2018 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge which have been addressed before us have been companysidered by this Court and rejected.
The appellants preferred an application seeking extension of time to deposit the amount of 25 of the companypensation amount.
P.C. filed by the appellants have been dismissed by the impugned judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 10.09.2019.
The 28 petitions under Section 482 Cr.
The learned trial companyrt has suspended the sentence of the appellants by order dated 13.11.2018 for 30 days.
The appellants were companyvicted in all 28 cases and the total amount to be deposited under the order of the Appellate Court was, in all cases, Rs.9,40,24,999/ .
1 and 2 are partners of appellant No.3, M s. Bhoomi Infrastructure Co., number known as GLM Infratech Private Limited.
However, it is required to be numbered that at the time when the appeals against the companyviction of the Appellants for the offence Under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were preferred, Amendment Act No.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. These appeals have been filed against a companymon judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 10.09.2019 dismissing 28 petitions filed by the appellants under Section 482 of Cr.
P.C. filed by the appellants questioning the order dated 01.12,2019 were dismissed by the High Court vide its judgment dated 24.04.2019 against which judgment the appellants have also filed SLP Criminal Nos.4948 4975 of 2019 which were dismissed by this Court on 29.05.2019.
He submits that both Sections 143A and Section 148 inserted in NI Act by amendment Act 20 of 2018, hence Section 148 was number attracted in the present case which was only prospective and companyld have been utilised in offences which were companymitted after 01.09.2018.
The appellants were also number present when the case was taken by the Additional Sessions Judge on 20.07.2019.
