Yesh Paul vs Param Vir Singh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1601 j&K

                                                                      Sr. No. 09



      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                       AT JAMMU

                                               CRR No.45/2016
                                               IA No.1/2016

Yesh Paul                                            ....Petitioner/Appellant(s)

                  Through :- Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate


         V/s

Param Vir Singh                                              ....Respondent(s)

                Through :-   Mr. Rajeev Chargotra, Advocate


Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

                                   ORDER

03.12.2021

This criminal revision is directed against the judgment of conviction dated

06.08.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kathua ["Appellate

Court"] in file No.09/Appeal titled Yash Paul Gupta v. Param Vir Singh,

whereby the Appellate Court has confirmed the conviction of the petitioner

recorded by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kathua ["trial Court"]

vide its judgment dated 14.11.2013.

As it emerges from the impugned judgment, the complaint lodged by the

respondent under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner

had its genesis to a business transaction between the petitioner and the

respondents and the issuance of cheque amounting to Rs.1,70,000/- by the

petitioner in favour of the respondent which was later dishonoured by the banker

of the petitioner. The trial Court found the petitioner guilty of commission of

offence and sentenced him to simple imprisonment of one year with fine of

Rs.3,40,000/-, to be paid to the respondent-complainant. The judgment of

conviction was assailed by the petitioner before the Appellate Court, which

concurred with the trial Court and upheld the conviction. This is how the

petitioner is before this Court by way of instant revision petition.

During the pendency of the revision petition, the parties have amicably

settled the issue and have recorded the settlement in the compromise deed dated

18.10.2021, which deed the parties have placed on record. As is noted in order

dated 22.10.2021, both the parties had appeared before this Court and made a

statement that they had entered into a compromise voluntarily and had amicably

settled the dispute between them.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that pursuant to the settlement

of dispute, he does not wish to prosecute the petitioner anymore and shall have

no objection, if judgment of conviction recorded by the trial court and upheld by

the Appellate Court is set aside.

Having regard to the submissions made at the Bar coupled with the

statement made by the parties in person and also in view of the amicable

settlement of dispute having been reduced in writing in terms of the compromise

deed dated 18.10.2021, I am of the considered view that ends of justice would be

met by setting aside the judgment of the trial Court as well as Appellate court.

Ordered accordingly.

The judgment of conviction recorded by the trial Court dated 14.11.2013

and the judgment of Appellate Court dated 06.08.2016, whereby conviction of

the petitioner was upheld, both are set aide and the petitioner is exonerated of all

the charges.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

Jammu:

03.12.2021 Vinod, PS Whether the order is speaking :Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No