IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JASKARAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER – Respondent
(cid:1) (cid:1)
(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:1)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:10)(cid:3)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:1)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:17)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:18)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:15)(cid:1)
(cid:15)(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:17)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:5)(cid:1)(cid:1)
(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)
CRR-3384-2025 (O&M)
(cid:17)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:1)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:1)(cid:24)(cid:21)ti(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:22)(cid:28)(cid:29)(cid:1)(cid:30)(cid:31) !(cid:31) (cid:30)!(cid:30)"
(cid:1)
JASKARAN SINGH (cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:1)
(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:15)
(cid:15)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:16)(cid:21)(cid:22)(cid:18)(cid:23)(cid:1)(cid:18)(cid:21)(cid:24)(cid:1)(cid:18)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:17)ti(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:14)(cid:6)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:28)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:7)(cid:26)(cid:1)(cid:1)
(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:11)(cid:15)#(cid:1)(cid:29)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:3)$(cid:16)%(cid:6)(cid:1)#(cid:11) (cid:1)(cid:14)(cid:10)&(cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:8)(cid:6)(cid:1)’(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:1)& (cid:1)(cid:16)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:17)((cid:15)(cid:14)(cid:1)
(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) )))))(cid:1)
(cid:5)(cid:11)(cid:6)(cid:26)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:7)(cid:29)(cid:1)(cid:30)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:31)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:1) !(cid:27)(cid:8)"(cid:1) #!(cid:10)(cid:10)!$(cid:1)(cid:18)(cid:28)%(cid:9)&!(cid:7)(cid:6)(cid:1)
(cid:1) (cid:1) ’(cid:9)(cid:11)(cid:1)(cid:7)#(cid:6)(cid:1)(cid:27)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:1) (cid:1)
(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) ((((((cid:1)
’(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:1)& (cid:1)(cid:16)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:17)((cid:15)(cid:14)*(cid:1)(cid:14) (cid:1)+(cid:9),(cid:19)-.
1. The instant revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sri Muktsar Sahib wherein the the petitioner has been convicted for a period of two years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 07 days as well as the judgment dated 13.11.2025 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib whereby his appeal had been partly allowed and while maintaining the judgment of conviction, the sentence had been reduced to one year.
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that Complaint bearing CIS No. NIA/73/2021 was instituted by the respondent–complainant, a non-banking finance company, against the petitioner herein. The respondent–complainant averred that it is engaged in the business of financing, leasing and hire purchase of machines and equipment. It was averred that the petitioner approached the respondent– complainant for financial assistance for purchase of a vehicle, namely TATA LPT 2515 bearing registration No. RJ-04GA-0601, for his personal requirements. Pursuant thereto, a loan agreement was executed between the parties on 13.07.2018, whereunder a sum of Rs. 3,80,000/- was advanced to the petitioner. The loan amount was agreed to be repaid in 36 equated monthly instalments. According to the respondent–complainant, the petitioner committed default in adhering to the terms and conditions of repayment and failed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite repeated demands. Eventually, towards discharge of his liability, the petitioner issued cheque No. 66
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.