Full Order Text
Order 3 · 19 Apr 2025 · CNR DLCT010008682025
Order Details: COPY OF ORDER Pdf Text: M/s Maa Kalka Jewellery House & Anr. v. M/s Agarwal Jewellers CNR No.: DLCT01-000868-2025 Crl. Appeal No. 27/2025 19.04.2025 Present : Mr. S. Bharti and Mr. Mohd. Nadeem, Ld. Counsel for the appellants. Mr. Ashok Mahipal, Ld. Counsel for the respondent. Mr. Ajay Aggarwal, partner of respondent. Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of the respondent by Sh. Ashok Mahipal, Ld. Counsel. Same is taken on record. Notably, despite an opportunity being afforded to the Ld. Counsel for the appellant on the last date of hearing, to address arguments regarding the maintainability of the application, seeking exemption for depositing the fine amount, post the directions having already been issued by this Court on 22.01.2025, no arguments on the said application have been addressed today. On the contrary, Ld. Counsel for the appellant has requested for an adjournment on the ground that he is not prepared with the arguments. It is reiterated that at the time when notice was issued on the present appeal, neither any such application, as aforesaid was filed by/on behalf of the appellant nor any prayer made by Ld. Counsel for the appellant on 22.01.2025, seeking exemption from the depositing the fine. Further, no such application was annexed with the present appeal as well. In fact, it was only subsequently, on 17.03.2025 that such an application was filed. Markedly, even on 17.03.2025, this Court had inquired from the Ld. Counsel for the appellant regarding the Contd..2/- -- 1 of 2 -- ..2.. maintainability of such application, once the direction for deposit of 20% of the fine amount had already been passed on 22.01.2025. Upon this, Ld. Counsel for the appellant had submitted that he would place on record, case laws, in support of his prayer. However, till date, neither any case laws are forthcoming nor any arguments addressed. On the contrary, as aforenoted, request for adjournment is again sought today. Needless to mention that the period of 60 days as provided under Section 148(2) N.I. Act has already lapsed. Further, Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that copy of the present application has not been supplied to him. Accordingly, under such circumstances, this Court is left with no other option than to issue notice to the SDM. Issue recovery warrant against the appellant under Section 431 read with Section 421 of Cr. P.C. through the concerned SDM, for recovery of 20% of the fine amount for the next date of hearing. In the interest of justice and as prayed for, list for arguments on 29.07.2025. Abhishek Goyal ASJ-03, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi 19.04.2025 -- 2 of 2 --