Bombay High Court
Subodh S/O. Dulichand Bothara vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. The ... on 28 September, 2017
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
Judgment
revn112.17 6
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.112 OF 2017
Subodh s/o Dulichand Bothara,
Aged 55 years, Occupation Business,
R/o Parshioni, Tahsil Parshioni,
District Nagpur. ..... Applicant.
:: VERSUS ::
1. The State of Maharashtra, through
the Police Station Officer,
Lakadganj Police Station,
Lakadganj, Nagpur.
2. Mittal Finance and Investment
through its Proprietor Shri
Murlidhar s/o Suganchand Agrawal,
Aged 52 years, Occupation Business,
R/o 222, Mittal Villa, East
Wardhman Nagar, Nagpur. ..... Non-applicants.
================================================================
Shri S.G. Malode, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri M.P. Jain, Counsel for non-applicant No.2.
Shri R.S. Nayak, Addl.P.P. for the State.
================================================================
CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 28, 2017.
.....2/-
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2017 01:46:31 :::
Judgment
revn112.17 6
2
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard
finally by consent of learned counsel appearing for the
parties.
2. The present revision is directed against judgment
and order of conviction passed by learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class at Nagpur in Summary Criminal Case No.15828 of
2006 dated 22.7.2009, by which learned Magistrate convicted
the present applicant for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. On he
being found guilty for the offence punishable under Section
138 of the said Act, learned Magistrate inflicted 2 months'
simple jail imprisonment on the applicant. At the same time,
it was directed by learned Magistrate that within a period of
30 days from the date of judgment, the applicant should pay
Rs.4.00 Lacs towards compensation to the original
complainant. Failing which, further 2 months' jail sentence
.....3/-
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2017 01:46:31 :::
Judgment
revn112.17 6
3
was imposed upon him.
3. Being aggrieved by such judgment and order of
conviction, the present applicant preferred an appeal before
the Lower Appellate Court. The said was registered as
Criminal Appeal No.150 of 2009. The Appellate Court on
25.7.2017 dismissed the appeal.
4. The applicant, who was on bail during the
pendency of the appeal, was taken into custody and was sent
to jail.
5. The applicant filed the revision before this Court
on 29.7.2017 challenging the aforesaid judgment and order of
conviction along with Criminal Application No.148 of 2017 for
suspension of substantive jail sentence and for grant of bail.
The present revision along with the application for grant of
bail was listed before this Court on 7.8.2017. On the said day,
learned counsel Shri S.G. Malode for the applicant submitted
.....4/-
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2017 01:46:31 :::
Judgment
revn112.17 6
4
that dispute between the applicant and non-applicant No.2
original complainant is already resolved and necessary
application for compounding will be filed. In that view of the
matter, this Court issued notices to the non-applicant original
complainant. At the same time, this Court granted the bail in
favour of the present applicant by suspending substantive jail
sentence imposed upon him.
6. Today, when the matter was listed for admission,
both applicant and non-applicant No.2 moved a joint
application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881 for compounding of the offence punishable under
Section 138 of the said Act. The application is duly signed by
applicant Subodh s/o Dulichand Bothara and non-applicant
No.2 Murlidhar s/o Suganchand Agrawal, proprietor of Mittal
Finance and Investment. Also, the application is duly signed
by learned counsel for both the parties viz. learned counsel
Shri S.G. Malode for the applicant and learned counsel Shri
.....5/-
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2017 01:46:31 :::
Judgment
revn112.17 6
5
M.P. Jain for non-applicant No.2. The application is affirmed
by the applicant. A separate affidavit of non-applicant No.2
Murlidhar s/o Suganchand Agrawal, proprietor of Mittal
Finance and Investment is filed on record and the same is
marked as Annexure-X for the purposes of identification. In
the said affidavit also, Shri Agrawal reiterates about the
compromise between the applicant and non-applicant No.2.
Both applicant and non-applicant No.2 are identified
respectively by their respective counsel. The Court also
personally verified from them about the compromise.
According to learned counsel for non-applicant No.2, he has
received D.D.No.857773 of Rs.4,00,000/- dated 21.8.2017 drawn
on Shikshak Sahakari Bank Limited, Nagpur (Kamptee
Branch). The original complainant acknowledges the receipt.
7. The offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act
is a compoundable offence in view of the provisions of Section
147 of the said Act.
.....6/-
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2017 01:46:31 :::
Judgment
revn112.17 6
6
8. In view of the amicable settlement between the
parties in the present proceedings and when non-applicant
No.2 original complainant has not only extended consent but
also compounded the offence, the said compounding is
permitted by this Court. Consequently, I pass the following
order:
ORDER
i) Criminal application filed under Section 147 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for
compounding the offence is hereby allowed and
disposed of.
ii) In view of compounding of the offence,
judgment and order passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class at Nagpur in Summary
Criminal Case No.15828 of 2006 dated 22.7.2009 so
also judgment and order passed by learned
.....7/-
Judgment
revn112.17 6
District Judge-15 & Additional Sessions Judge at
Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No.150 of 2009 dated
25.7.2017 are hereby quashed and set aside.
iii) As the matter stands compounded, applicant
Subodh s/o Dulichand Bothara stands acquitted of
the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
iv) The bail bonds of the applicants stand
cancelled.
v) With this, the criminal revision application is
disposed of.
JUDGE
!! BRW !!
...../-
