IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CRMMOs No.200 & 201 of 2010 Date of decision : November 9, 2010 CRMMO No.200/2010 Rajeev Nag …Petitioner. Versus Anil Sharma and another …Respondents. CRMMO No.201/2010 Rajeev Nag …Petitioner. Versus Anil Sharma and another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s) : M/s T.S. Chauhan & Surinder Saklani, Advocates (In both the petitions). For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General, for respondent No.2. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) By means of this order, two petitions, i.e. the present petition (CRMMO No.200 of 2010) and CRMMO No.201 of 2010, are being disposed of. 2. Petitioner (in both the petitions) has challenged the orders of learned Sessions Court, whereby revision petitions of the petitioner, for setting aside the orders of trial Magistrate, declaring the petitioner as proclaimed offender, have been held to be not maintainable. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 3. Two complaints have been field against the present petitioner by respondent Anil Sharma, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Complaints are in respect of two separate dishonoured cheques, the aggregate amount of which is `1,03,000/-. 4. Petitioner initially appeared before the trial Court, but lateron he jumped bail. Warrants were issued, but those could not be executed. Therefore, he was declared a proclaimed offender. He challenged the orders of the Judicial Magistrate, declaring him proclaimed offender, by filing revision petitions before the Sessions Judge. Those revision petitions have been dismissed, vide impugned orders. So, the petitioner has approached this Court. 5. Perusal of the record shows that a sum of `20,000/-, out of the aggregate amount of `1,03,000/-, has already been paid by the petitioner in the Court of Judicial Magistrate. Remaining amount of `83,000/-, he has paid in this Court. Money has been paid to the Court Master, who is directed to hand it over to the concerned official of the Accounts Branch of the Registry, who will deposit it in the appropriate account maintained by the Registry and then remit the same to the respondent, by transfer into his Savings Bank Account, number of which will be supplied by the learned counsel for the respondent, namely Mr. Ajay Sharma. Registry shall remit the amount to respondent Anil Sharma, as aforesaid, within two days of its being apprised of the account number of the respondent. …3… 6. Learned counsel for respondent Anil Sharma says that on account of the entire money of the two cheques having been deposited, complaints may be ordered to be dismissed. In view of the abovestated position, complaints instituted against the petitioner are dismissed. Present petitions stand disposed of. Pending application also stands disposed of, having become infructuous. November 9, 2010(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J