GUWAHATI, India, July 28 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on June 27:

1. Heard Mr. B. Dutta, the senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Poddar, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. This is an application under Section 438 and 442 of the BNSS, 2023 challenging the judgment dated 21.03.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh in Criminal Appeal No.36(3)/2024.

3. The petitioner gave a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh) to the respondent. Thereafter, on 14.10.2022, the respondent wrote a letter to the petitioner whereby he admitted to have taken Rs.10,00,000/- from him. Moreover, with that letter, the respondent issued six numbers of cheque worth in total Rs.11,20,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Twenty Thousand) to the petitioner. The cheques were dishonoured by the Bank. Therefore, the petitioner filed the case being N.I. Case No.62/2023 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Dibrugarh against the present respondent.

1.2023, the respondent filed a petition whereby he deposited a cash amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and prayed that he may be given opportunity to pay the balance amount to the petitioner in instalments of Rs.1,00,000/-. After consideration of the prayer made by the respondent, the trial court directed the respondent to pay Rs.1,50,000/- every month to the present petitioner towards liquidation of loan amount of Rs.10,000,00/-. The court posted the matter on 02.01.2024 for payment of the first instalment of Rs.1,50,000/-.

5. Unfortunately, even after that, the trial court continued the trial by recording evidences etc. and finally, on 19.08.2024, passed a judgment convicting the respondent under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The trial court held that though the respondent paid Rs.2,00,000/-, but failed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.9,20,000/-. The the respondent was sentenced to pay the fine of Rs.10,00,000/-. The respondent filed an appeal before the court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge, allowed the appeal and the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class was set aside.

6. Mr. Dutta has relied upon a Circular of this Court dated 2nd August, 2021. The relevant portion of the said Circular is quoted as under:

"PRACTICE DIRECTIONS"

II. It shall be explained to the accused person that if he intends to make any application expressing his desire to remit payment against the dishonoured cheque in terms of the of the guidelines stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeals No.963 of 2010 with Nos.964-66 of 2010 titled as Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H., reported in (2010) 5 SCC 663, he can do so by making an application. If such an application is made by the accused person, the Court shall, in presence of the complainant, consider the same in terms of the said guidelines and shall dispose of the case, if the application is found in conformity with those guidelines.

II. Section 375 of the Code inter alia provides that when an accused person has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on such plea, there shall be no appeal if the conviction is by a Court of Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate of first class, except as to the extent or legality of the sentence. The Court while stating the particulars of the offence, shall also inform the accused person the consequence of his pleading guilty of the offence in terms of the provision contained in Section 375 of the Code."

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xxKruamL0CCJ%2B7ysXf%2BQh9zECdueRSBZ44h03Ud9Jfrn&caseno=Crl.Rev.P./155/2025&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010091812025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.