Jharkhand High Court
Md. Kalim Son Of Manjoor Alam vs The State Of Jharkhand on 22 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 886 of 2012
Md. Kalim son of Manjoor Alam, Resident of Kallu Chowk
Pagmil, P.O.- Hazaribagh, P.S. - Sadar, District - Hazaribagh
... ... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Shantanu Mishra son of Sushant Kumar Mishra, Resident of
Village- Maheshra, P.O.- Jhumra, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.-
Hazaribagh ... ... Opp. Parties
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Afaque Rashid, Advocate
For the O.P. No.2 : Tarun Kumar
---
Through Video Conferencing
10/22.07.2021
1. Heard Mr. Afaque Rashid, the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner.
2. Heard Mr. Tarun Kumar, the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of Opposite Party No.2.
3. This criminal revision petition is directed against the
Judgment dated 27.07.2012 passed by the learned District &
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Land
Acquisition, Hazaribag in Criminal Appeal No. 216/2011
whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court
confirmed the conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of
the Indian Penal Code, but modified the sentence of the
petitioner to Simple Imprisonment for 06 months and to pay
compensation of Rs.1,11,000/- to the Complainant within 03
months under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. and in default of
payment of the compensation, directed the learned trial court to
ensure recovery of the same in accordance with law.
4. The learned trial court vide Judgment of conviction and
the order of sentence dated 17.10.2011 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag in Complaint Case No.
1519/2009 (T.R. No. 933/2011) had convicted the petitioner for
the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
and had sentenced him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for
one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of
payment of the fine, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for
further two months.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner has filed an affidavit before this Court
annexing copy of Demand Draft No.001290 dated 19.07.2021 of
Rs. 1,11,000/- issued in favour of the Opposite Party No.2. He
submitted that the petitioner is ready to compromise the
dispute by payment of the compensation amount to the
Opposite Party No.2 through the aforesaid demand draft. He
submitted that if the aforesaid demand draft is acceptable to the
Opposite Party No.2, then appropriate order may be passed in
the present case in connection with the compromise.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Opposite Party
No.2 submitted that he has taken specific instruction from his
client that his client is ready to accept the aforesaid amount of
Rs. 1,11,000/- by way of compromise and he has also taken
instruction from his client that the demand draft be handed
over to him, so that it may be transmitted to his client. He
submitted that as per the instruction of his client, he has no
objection, if the conviction as well as the sentence of the
petitioner is set aside in view of the compromise which is
acceptable to the Opposite Party No.2.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this
Court finds that the present case arises out of conviction of the
petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 and the involved cheque in the present
case was for an amount of Rs. 1,11,000/-.
8. This Court further finds that the petitioner as well as the
Opposite Party No.2 has now entered into a compromise and
the petitioner has already filed a copy of the demand draft of
Rs. 1,11,000/- issued in favour of the Opposite Party No.2 and
the Opposite Party No.2 is ready to accept the same and has
also no objection, if the conviction as well as the sentence of the
petitioner is set aside.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstance of the
case and in view of the compromise reached between the
parties, the Judgment dated 27.07.2012 passed by the learned
District & Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Land
Acquisition, Hazaribag in Criminal Appeal No. 216/2011 and
also the Judgment dated 17.10.2011 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag in Complaint Case No.
1519/2009 (T.R. No. 933/2011) are set aside.
10. The petitioner is acquitted from the accusation under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and he is
discharged from the liability of his bail bond.
11. The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to hand
over the demand draft of Rs. 1,11,000/- to the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of Opposite Party No.2 by tomorrow i.e.
23.07.2021 and take a receipt of the same and file it before this
Court. The learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 shall
hand over the demand draft to the Opposite Party No.2.
12. Accordingly, with aforesaid findings and directions, the
present criminal revision petition is hereby disposed of.
13. Let the lower court records be sent back to the court
concerned.
14. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court
below through 'E-mail/FAX'.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Mukul
