Judgment · High Court · 2012
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 s. 138
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 397(3), 482
Judgment
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA None present for the petitioner. Mr.MA Bhurat, PP, for the respondent State. ... The present misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 21.8.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Udaipur in Criminal Revision No.33/2008 whereby he has affirmed the order dated 23.10.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate No.1 (North), Udaipur in Criminal Case No.824/2007 taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petition was filed in the year 2008. Thereafter, there is no stay operating in favour of the petitioner. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner before this Court for prosecuting the case on a number of occasions. Today also, there is nobody to argue the matter on behalf of the petitioner. I have gone through the grounds taken in the misc. petition assailing the orders impugned and have perused the orders impugned. From a perusal of the grounds it does not appear that there are any valid grounds for setting aside the order 2 taking cognizance. The petition has been filed simply taking the plea that the bouncing of the cheque on the payment whereof being stopped, cannot be said to be covered by Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The legal situation in this regard is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a number of cases has held that even if the cheque has been dishonoured because of stop payment, it amounts to an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Thus, no interference is called for in the impugned orders in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In fact, the present misc. petition is nothing but a second revision in the garb of a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. A second revision by the same party is barred under Section 397(3) Cr.P.C. In view of the above, the present misc. petition, having no force, is hereby dismissed. Stay petition also stands dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the trial court immediately. (SANDEEP MEHTA), J. S.Phophaliya
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 397(3), 482.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Rajasthan High Court, on 21 Feb 2012. The bench was SANDEEP MEHTA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.