MOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Section 427 read with Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed on behalf of petitioner Mohan Lal, sole proprietor of M/s. Lakbir Singh Mohan Lal with the prayer that the sentences awarded in two different cases be ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of complaint filed by complainant-respondent No.2 in respect of dishonour of cheque for a sum of Rs. 2 lacs under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the petitioner was convicted vide judgment dated 16th January, 2007 and sentenced to undergo RI for two years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. Appeal was dismissed and criminal revision filed before the High Court was partly allowed and sentence of imprisonment was reduced from two years to one year but the sentence of fine remained the same. In another complaint No. 12/2 dated 24.1.2003 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act'), the petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 16th January, 2007 and sentenced to undergo RI for two years with fine of Rs. 5000/-and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. The appeal was dismissed and the criminal revision filed in the High Court was partly allowed and sentence of imprisonment was reduced from two years to one year RI and sentence of fine remained the same.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that both the complaints were under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and were decided on the same day i.e. 16th January, 2007. Learned counsel also submits that petitioner is having three minor children and facing agony of protracted criminal proceedings since the year 2003 and because of lapse on the part of the lawyers appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the courts below, order for running the sentence concurrently could not be passed. The petitioner should not suffer due to lapse on the part of the lawyers appearing for him. The petitioner has no criminal background. He has been convicted and sentenced under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in both the cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in Achalchand Sancheti v. State of Rajasthan, 2010 3 RCR(Cri) 576 in support of his contention.