Ujjwal Ghosh vs Hasib Choudhury
2021 Latest Caselaw 3723 Cal

Form No. J(2)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate Side

Present:

The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta

CRR 3147 of 2016 With CRAN 2 of 2021

Ujjwal Ghosh Vs.

                            Hasib Choudhury


For the Petitioner             : Mr. J. K. Sanwarwala

For the OP                     : Ms. Farah Anjum


Heard on: 13th July, 2021

Judgment on : 13th July, 2021


       The Court:

This is an application challenging the judgment and order

dated 17.02.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, 2nd Court, Suri, Birbhum in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of

2013, thereby affirming the judgment and order dated

19.06.2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Suri, Birbhum in C. Case No. 118 of 2010 under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act.

For the purported dishonour of a cheque of Rs. 98,801/-,

the complainant-opposite party initiated a proceeding against

the accused-petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act. By an order dated 19.06.2013, the learned

Trial Court convicted the petitioner for the alleged offence and

directed him to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and

to pay fine of Rs. 1,25,000/- out of which Rs. 1, 15,000/- was

to be given to the complainant as compensation, a sum of

Rs.5,000/- was given to be given to the DLSA and the another

sum of Rs.5,000/- was to be remitted to the State.

Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order

passed by the learned trial Judge, the petitioner preferred an

appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2013. On 17.02.2016

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Suri,

Birbhum was pleased to dismiss the same.

Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred the present

application before this Court. The delay in preferring the

application was condoned on 23.11.2016.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits as follows. In the course of the proceeding, a

compromise and settlement was arrived at between the

accused petitioner and the complainant opposite party. The

entire sum of Rs. 1,15,000/- was paid to the complainant

opposite party. A sum of Rs. 5,000/- was also paid to the

DLSA. Since it was not clear as to which authority of the State

the sum of Rs. 5,000/- was to be paid, the same could not be

paid. However, the petitioner undertakes to make the said

payment to the appropriate authority as per direction of this

Court. In view of the settlement and compromise arrived at

between the private parties, the conviction of sentence imposed

upon the petitioner may be quashed and set aside.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant

opposite party submits as follows. A settlement and

compromise has actually been arrived at between the private

parties. The complainant has received the sum of Rs.

1,15,000/- as directed to be paid by the learned trial Court. It

appears that a payment of Rs. 5,000/- has also been made by

the complainant to the DLSA. In view of the same, the

complainant opposite party does not have any objection if the

impugned conviction and sentence are set aside.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels

appearing on behalf of the accused petitioner and the

complainant-opposite party and have perused the revision

petition and the joint application for compromise.

It appears that a compromise and settlement has indeed

been arrived at between the private parties and the

complainant has received the sum that was awarded by the

learned trial Court. The payment to the DLSA has also been

effected and the petitioner undertakes to pay a sum of Rs.

5,000/- as per direction of this Court.

In view of the compromise arrived at between the accused

petitioner and the complainant opposite party, I quash and set

aside the conviction of sentence imposed upon the petitioner

by the learned trial Court.

However, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/-

to the State Legal Services Authority within a week from this

date and file a copy of the receipt for the same before the

learned Registrar General, High Court at Calcutta within a

week from such payment.

With these observations, the revisional application and

the connected application are disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be

delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for,

upon compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta,J.)

ssi