XI-HC-22 an^i^i h-u* s^s ?ti+lich tlf&fl .-:r wr -reg •3IPIRPI, ^tftms; ^rey ®(I^TxRra? -^. ^tt/O?- *llwili'Sh*li<:n"""""""""'""""""""""'H;l 200 •fq^r-""""""""""""-"" sn^i.l^iiwdfCT Slriale Bench: HonbleMr. Justice Dhirendra Mishra Cp.M.lt PETmQNBl R.N.W nbout Nagar 'Raipur shra, s/o Shri B. Mishra, Mauhan, aged ^O yeors, R/o MI6-783, Veersaborkcr jColony, Heerapir Reripur, Tohsii & t>ist. Vs RESPOND&^T 12.9.2007 yeors, Naka, oLit Mr. Rakesh Pandey, Adv) Heard. ; The petitioner has fil^d Cr.P.C. dgainst the order dat^d 90/07 whereby leamed 10th rejected his r'evision arisjng by learned Additional Chief| No.146/07 whereby the petit|< fine ampunt of Rs.l,25,OQO/- dated 14.8.2006 passed in The short questiori invo|l whether warront for levy of fir Cr.P.C. against cn accused, wh| pay fine with stipulation thatj <:ft]<iT<n'4il'i *ii*i<rtf^ f^^ <r<ii$i< ^? 3 OT SII^I J^o.354/2007 Jdin, S/o Pukhrcy Joiin, aged about. 31 Proprietor- M/s Jaih Bricks, Pachmedhi (aipur (C©) for the petitioner. this petition under Section 482 of 19.7.2007 pas^d in Criminal Revision Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur has of the order dated 11.5.2007 passed Jydicial Magistrate, Raipur in MJC oner has been directed to deposit the mposed on him by tfiis Court vide order Revision No.405/2006. |lved for adjudication of this petition is fine can be issued under Section 421 of o has been convicted w\d sentenced to in default of pcsyment of fine he ^Tgll Criitiinal !tI ;* f' ^ XI-HC-22 sn^i^r R-ii* 3D^T SP-lfcfi ^ificT B!l TS? •^l''<l<yl<<. afllws. (a"'"*il< ^v 3TT^?r •q^g? IIHCTI th*IK*) "ffl, 200 fq^sr" 3II^I;?^IIW 'dfCT —2-- imprison^nent thbt undergoj simple imprisonment undergone the sinipte imprison^ It is not in diq^ute criminal revision of the petiti^ the sentence awarded to'himl for the^ period already i^und^ Rs.l,50^»0/-;and in defautt undergo; 5.1. for 3 months. 1] totat amount of fine, Rs.1,25] Manoj Jain towards principal| towards interest and other petitiorier did notdeposif thi upon him by this Court- and in| jail sentence of threemonthsj The warrant for levy ChOpter-XXXH of Cr.P.C., whi| " 421. Warront for lev)< sentenced to pa/afine, action for the recovefy o| ways, that is to sa/, it m^y 4)1^41'! 'WM? ^ Fs^l <Rl^l< ^K siPw aii^i For specific period ondwho has already on defaultofpoiytnent of fine? this Cburt whiiepartty allowing the ^ner, mdintaihed his conviction, however, \yms modifled by awarding Jail sentence srgone by him and to pay a fine of >f poEyment of fine, he was directed to • has been fyrt-her directed that out of POO/- shalt be paid to the complainant amount due under the cheque as also penses. It isalso not in dispute that the fine amount of Rs.1,50,000/- imposed lieu of the same he has undergone the as ordered by this Court. >f fine is issued under Section 421 of =h is reproduced here under:- exbenses. of fine.- (l) When <m offender has been the Court passing the sentence ma/ take the fine in either or both of the fotlowing 1 f 1 1i» ^ XI-HC.22 311^1 WI 'fTiJ? aiJRI. '^T ^fl -T3 •^(CT?P(, '^ftwre. P«ni'M3< 31T^?T •q^?R HIHCTI gillth "^ 200 ft^y OT^ii's^nw^ifta —3't the amoUnt sKall unleks (a) issue a WwMint for| sale of any movable (b) issue a warrant to to realize the movable or immoyctel Pranfided thot, if the senl the fine; th& offender uhdepgone the whole of issue such war'r'ont writing, it considers it ofder for the poyment o') under section 357." (2) The State ©ovemmer|t which warronts under executed, and for -Hie any person other than attoched in execution of i3) Where the cotrt ISSI^B! (b) of sub-section (1), accordance with the lawl r-evenue, as if such warartt Provided that no such detention in prison of the| issdss *wici41-i i)m?if 4 l^zt <["|«(K ^; sipOT'sii^r |the levy of the amiauntJiy fft-t'ochment and ^roperfy belonging to the offender. Collector of the district, authorizing him as wrem's of land revenue from the s|e property or bQth.of thedefaulter. ^ence dir'ects that in default of payment of be imprisoned, md if such offender has |uch imprisonment in defautt, no court shall for- speciat redsons to be recorded in n4cessary so to do, or unless it has made an expenses or cornpensort'ion out of the fihe mcy make r-ules regulating the manner in [lcMse (a) of sub-section (1) we to be sui|nmary determinatipn of any cleams made by \he offender in respect of any property tuch warrant. o warrant to the Coltector under* clause (he Collector shdll realize the amount in relating to recovery of arrears of land were a cert'ificote issued under such law; w^rrant shal! be executed by th^_ayest or loffender. 1. v-w ~ t { XI-HC-22 3II^5t%I •{S^sn^t sfr^lN) K^ifl !^-i -^sg 'i||*ll<'f'i|, dTil'M'lti. Ridwy 3TI^?T 'lRra? lt<'iwi.?niitn " ^IT. 2W "fe5^I"""""""""""""""""" sn^il'g^iiwnfsa From pewsa[ of the pro^i whene the sentence directs th<|i offerider shatl be imprisoned, dn|i whole of such imprisonment in unless special reasons are recpr[ hces mdde an order for tKe payn{ of the fine under Section 357. Both the courts below taft this Courl'ithatout of the amoul Rs.1,25,000/- ispcyable to the the cheque, inferest and other ^ have directed the petitioner in Cr.P.C. to deposit the above sum In viewof the proviso to is Strictly in accordance with interference by this Court-. , In the result, the petitior) to be dismissed and it is accordir^gly tHe ^)T14ld'lfl'i ^Wv^ ^ fc%l <^(t<rK ^i 3lPOT 3lA?I iso to 5ection421 it is evident that ^t in default of payment of fine the |d if such offencter has undergone the Idefautt, warrant is not to be issued Bed for the same or unless thecourl' {ent of expenses or compensation out |;ing into account the order passed by iht of fine i.e. Rs.1,50.000/-, a sum of |:omplainant being the amount against jxpensesincyrred by the complainant, fiew of the proviso to Section 421 of (icyable to the complainant. Section 421 of Cr.P.C. the above order law ond the same does not call for has no substance, the same is tiable dismissed. sd/-'^ DhirendraKIisbra Judge » ii