Muskan Enterprises vs State Of Punjab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 1331

DIPANKAR DATTA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Muskan Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv. Mr. Harvinder Singh Mann, Adv. Mr. Sakib Altaf, Adv. Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Mohd Irshad, A.A.G. Mr. Karan Sharma, AOR Mr. Dilpreet Singh Gandhi, Adv. Mr. Nishant Bishnoi, AOR Ms. Srishti Prabhakar, Adv. Mr. R. C. Goutam, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

DIPANKAR DATTA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The judgment and order dated 18th May, 2024, passed by a learned Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh¹[High Court] dismissing a petition²[CRM-M-25041-2024] under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973³[Cr. PC] preferred by the appellants is under assail in this appeal.

3. The basic facts are not in dispute.

4. Conviction for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881⁴[N. I. Act] had been recorded against the appellants by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Amloh, District Fatehgarh⁵[trial magistrate] vide judgment and order dated 15th September, 2022. Consequently, the second appellant (the proprietor of the first appellant) was sentenced to 2 years’ rigorous imprisonment; also, under Section 357(3), Cr. PC. they were directed to pay compensation of Rs.74,00,000/- (double the cheque amount) to the complainant who was given the liberty to recover the same from the appellants.

5. The conviction and sentence, as aforesaid, were carried in appeal by the appellants before the Sessions Court, Fatehgarh Sahib⁶[Sessions Court ]. While admitting the appeal by order dated 17th