Gamdoor Singh Gamdoor Singh v. Surinder Singh Surinder Singh
Case Details
2018 (O&M) CRR-3179-2018 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CRR CRR-3179-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 18.08.2025 Date of Decision: Gamdoor Singh Gamdoor Singh …Petitioner Versus Surinder Singh Surinder Singh ...Respondent CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present: None for the petitioner. None for the respondent. Mr. Sidharth Attri, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sidharth Attri, AAG, Punjab. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. 1. The instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of petitioner The instant revision petition Gamdoor has been filed on behalf of petitioner - Gamdoor Singh assailing judgment dated assailing judgment dated 10.08.2018 passed by Additional 10.08.2018 passed by learned Additional whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner challenging Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner challenging whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner challenging Sessions Judge, Mansa, his conviction for an offence under Section his conviction for 138 of the Negotiable Instruments offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘the Act’) (for short ‘the Act’) as recorded by learned udicial Magistrate, as recorded by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Mansa vide jud , has been dismissed. vide judgment dated 16.01.2015, has been dismissed. 2. while holding the petitioner guilty of having committed The trial Court, while holding the petitioner guilty of having committed while holding the petitioner guilty of having committed The trial Court, sentenced him to undergo rigorous offence under Section 138 of the Act, had sentenced him to undergo rigorous sentenced him to undergo rigorous offence under Section 138 of the Act, had imprisonment for 2 years and also imposed a fine of imprisonment for vide judgment and also imposed a fine of Rs.5000/- vide judgment dated 16.01.2015 The said judgment of trial Court was affirmed by the 16.01.2015. The said judgment of trial Court was affirmed by the The said judgment of trial Court was affirmed by the appellate Court vide impugned judgment. appellate Court vide impugned judgment. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2018 (O&M) CRR-3179-2018 (O&M) 2 3. 15.07.2019, this Court issued notice of At the time of preliminary hearing on 15.07.2019, this Court issued notice of 15.07.2019, this Court issued notice of At the time of preliminary hearing on motion to a limited extent so as to examine the propriety of sentence. The motion to a limited extent so as to examine the propriety of sentence. The motion to a limited extent so as to examine the propriety of sentence. The motion to a limited extent so as to examine the propriety of sentence. The said order dated 15.07.2019 is reproduced herein said order dated 15.07.2019 is reproduced herein under: By way of filing this petition, the petitioner assails judgment dated 10.8.2018 “By way of filing this petition, the petitioner assails judgment dated 10.8.2018 By way of filing this petition, the petitioner assails judgment dated 10.8.2018 By way of filing this petition, the petitioner assails judgment dated 10.8.2018 sed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby his conviction for passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby his conviction for sed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby his conviction for sed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby his conviction for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act has been upheld. offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act has been upheld. offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act has been upheld. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned judgment, has The learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned judgment, has The learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned judgment, has The learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned judgment, has submitted that, in the present case, the signatures as existing on the pronote and the submitted that, in the present case, the signatures as existing on the pronote and the submitted that, in the present case, the signatures as existing on the pronote and the submitted that, in the present case, the signatures as existing on the pronote and the cheque, allegedly issued by the petitioner, do not tally and which clearly shows that cheque, allegedly issued by the petitioner, do not tally and which clearly shows that cheque, allegedly issued by the petitioner, do not tally and which clearly shows that cheque, allegedly issued by the petitioner, do not tally and which clearly shows that fact the the said documents have been forged. It has further been submitted that in fact the the said documents have been forged. It has further been submitted that in the said documents have been forged. It has further been submitted that in execution of the pronote or the passing of the consideration pursuant to the said execution of the pronote or the passing of the consideration pursuant to the said execution of the pronote or the passing of the consideration pursuant to the said execution of the pronote or the passing of the consideration pursuant to the said pronote also does not stand established and, as such, it cannot be said that there was pronote also does not stand established and, as such, it cannot be said that there was pronote also does not stand established and, as such, it cannot be said that there was pronote also does not stand established and, as such, it cannot be said that there was y existing legal liability, in whose discharge the cheque had been issued. any existing legal liability, in whose discharge the cheque had been issued. y existing legal liability, in whose discharge the cheque had been issued. I have considered the aforesaid submissions. I have considered the aforesaid submissions. I have considered the aforesaid submissions. The petitioner has not examined any handwriting expert to show that the signatures The petitioner has not examined any handwriting expert to show that the signatures The petitioner has not examined any handwriting expert to show that the signatures The petitioner has not examined any handwriting expert to show that the signatures by him. Since from the in question as affixed on the cheque were not affixed by him. Since from the in question as affixed on the cheque were not affixed in question as affixed on the cheque were not affixed evidence on record, it is clearly established that the cheque in question had been evidence on record, it is clearly established that the cheque in question had been evidence on record, it is clearly established that the cheque in question had been evidence on record, it is clearly established that the cheque in question had been this Court does not issued pursuant to execution of the pronote by the petitioner, this Court does not issued pursuant to execution of the pronote by the petitioner, issued pursuant to execution of the pronote by the petitioner, find any infirmity in the findings as regards the conviction of the petitioner find any infirmity in the findings as regards the conviction of th find any infirmity in the findings as regards the conviction of th for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. However, there could be offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. However, there could be offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. However, there could be offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. However, there could be some room for reduction in sentence of imprisonment especially since the learned some room for reduction in sentence of imprisonment especially since the learned some room for reduction in sentence of imprisonment especially since the learned some room for reduction in sentence of imprisonment especially since the learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is not a previous convict. counsel has submitted that the petitioner is not a previous convict. counsel has submitted that the petitioner is not a previous convict. f motion to the limited extent of examining the propriety of sentence Notice of motion to the limited extent of examining the propriety of sentence Notice o for 18.8.2019. 18.8.2019 The State shall furnish custody certificate of the petitioner as well as the The State shall furnish custody certificate of the petitioner as well as the The State shall furnish custody certificate of the petitioner as well as the The State shall furnish custody certificate of the petitioner as well as the information as to whether the petitioner is wanted in any other case or not on the information as to whether the petitioner is wanted in any other case or not on the information as to whether the petitioner is wanted in any other case or not on the information as to whether the petitioner is wanted in any other case or not on the next date of hearing.” next date o 4. None has been Thereafter, the matter came to be adjourned several times. None has been Thereafter, the matter came to be adjourned several times. Thereafter, the matter came to be adjourned several times. Custody appearing on behalf of the petitioner since the last few dates. Custody appearing on behalf of the petitioner since appearing on behalf of the petitioner since 10.05.2023. The had also been produced before this Court on 10.05.2023. The had also been produced before this Court on certificate had also been produced before this Court on 10.05.2023 is reproduced herein under: order dated 10.05.2023 is reproduced herein under: order dated Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by learned State counsel “Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by learned State counsel Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by learned State counsel Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by learned State counsel today in Court, which is taken on record. today in Court, which is taken on record. today in Court, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has already been released. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has already been released As per custody certificate, the petitioner has already been released representation on behalf of the petitioner. However, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. However, there is no VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2018 (O&M) CRR-3179-2018 (O&M) 3 In the interest of justice, the matter is adjourned to 4.10.2023.” In the interest of justice, the matter is adjourned to 4.10.2023. In the interest of justice, the matter is adjourned to 4.10.2023. 5. order indicates that the petitioner had apparently A perusal of the aforesaid order indicates that the petitioner had apparently order indicates that the petitioner had apparently A perusal of the aforesaid been released upon completion of his sentence. been released upon As such, the instant revision completion of his sentence. As such, the instant revision loses its purpose particularly when it is has been rendered infructuous as it loses its purpose particularly when it is loses its purpose particularly when it is has been rendered infructuous as it only regarding the quantum of sentence that notice of motion had been issued. only regarding the quantum of sentence that notice of motion had been issued. only regarding the quantum of sentence that notice of motion had been issued. only regarding the quantum of sentence that notice of motion had been issued. 6. Consequently, the instant petition is disposed of having been rendered Consequently, the instant petition is disposed of having been rendered Consequently, the instant petition is disposed of having been rendered Consequently, the instant petition is disposed of having been rendered infructuous. infructuous. 18.08.2025 Vimal GURVINDER SINGH GILL) (GURVINDER SINGH GILL JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document