IQBAL HUSSAIN LASKAR Vs. AYAZ UDDIN HAZARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Y. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent and Mr. K. Khemka, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

(2.) This is a petition under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to compound the offence committed by the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act and further for setting aside and quashing the judgment and order dtd. 16/8/2018, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hailakandi in Criminal Appeal No. 44/2017, upholding the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi in CR Case No. 10(A)/2015, convicting the present petitioner for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act and sentencing him to undergo SI for 6 (six) months and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 as compensation.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. A. Y. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, that on being highly aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hailakandi in Criminal Appeal No. 44/2017 upholding the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi in CR Case No. 10(A)/2015, the present petitioner preferred a criminal revision petition along with one interlocutory application, being I.A. (Crl.) 136/2019, to condone the delay of 74 days in preferring the criminal revision petition. Accordingly the notice was also issued in the said interlocutory application. But the engaged counsel remained absent on several consecutive dates before this Court and finally on 19/10/2022, the said interlocutory application was dismissed for non-prosecution. However, it is the case of the petitioner that the fact of the dismissal of the said petition was never informed to the petitioner, rather the engaged counsel mislead the petitioner saying that the case is pending for disposal. As the said interlocutory application was dismissed, the revision petition was not admitted for hearing. Resultantly, the learned Court below issued warrant of arrest to secure the sentence and accordingly, on 17/2/2024, the present petitioner was arrested and since then, he is behind the bar.