Allahabad High Court
SHREYA VIDYARTHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL
Holding
The appeal is not maintainable before the High Court and must be filed before the competent Sessions Court.
Summary
The appellant, Shreya Vidyarthi, appealed to the Allahabad High Court against a conviction and fine imposed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the Additional Court II, Kanpur Nagar. Both parties agreed that the appeal should have been filed before the Sessions Court, not the High Court. The High Court examined the statutory provisions governing appeals under the Negotiable Instruments Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure. It held that the appeal was not maintainable before this Court. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable, but the Court granted liberty to the appellant to file a proper appeal before the competent Sessions Court within a reasonable time.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal against a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable before the High Court of Allahabad.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- Section 138
- criminal appeal
- jurisdiction
- maintainability
- High Court
- Sessions Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12182 of 2023
Shreya Vidyarthi
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Aishwarya Pratap Singh, Arvind Kumar
Tripathi, Sandeep Pandey, Urvashi
Kunwar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Vipin Kumar
Court No. - 93
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant
against the judgment and order dated 10.11.2023, passed by the learned
Presiding Officer, Additional Court II, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Complaint
No.20333 of 2020, Vijay Bakshi Vs. Shreya Vidyarthi, arising out of
proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Police
Station- Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar.
2. Heard Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and
Sri Vipin Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. By the impugned judgment, the respondent/accused was convicted and
sentenced to pay a fine with a direction that in default of payment of fine, he
shall undergo simple imprisonment.
3. At the time of hearing of the appeal, learned counsel for both parties,
fairly submitted that the appeal against the said judgment ought to have been
filed before the Court of Sessions and that the present appeal before this
Court is not maintainable. It has been jointly prayed that the present appeal
be dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the appellant to file an
appropriate appeal before the competent Sessions Court.
4. This Court has considered the submissions made by learned counsels for
the parties. In view of the nature of the impugned order and the statutory
scale, governing appeals under the Negotiable Instruments Act, read with the
Code Of Criminal Procedure., the present appeal is not maintainable before
this Court.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable, however, a
liberty is granted to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the
CRLA No. 12182 of 2023
2
competent court of sessions in accordance with law.
6. It is further directed that if such an appeal is filed within a reasonable
period, the same shall be considered on its own merits in accordance with
law.
May 6, 2026
P. Pandey
(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
PUSHPENDRA PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…