Jharkhand High Court
Uma Shankar Singh @ Uma Shankar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 October, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No.772 of 2012
With
I.A. No.5741 of 2021
Uma Shankar Singh @ Uma Shankar,
Son of late Jwala Prasad @ Srikant
Resident of Shashtri Nagar, Block No.3
P.O. & P.S. Kadma Town, Jamshedpur
District - Singhbhum East .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite party
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate
For the Opp. Party No.2 : Mr. D.K. Karmakar, Advocate
For the State : None
Through:Video Conferencing
8/5.10.2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Amit Kumar Das is
present along with learned counsel Mr. Saurav Kumar.
2. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 Mr. D.K. Karmakar
is present.
3. Nobody appears on behalf of the State.
4. This Cr. Revision is directed against the judgment dated
16.08.2012 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge in Cr.
Appeal No.195 of 2010, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has
been dismissed and the learned appellate court has upheld the
judgment dated 26.08.2010 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Jamshedpur in G.R. Case No.2484 of 2008 (T.R. No.175 of
2010), arising out of Kadma P.S. Case No.173 of 2008. The petitioner
has been convicted for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the
IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three
years and a fine of Rs.4,000/- for the offence under Section 406 of IPC
and he was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for
three years and fine of Rs.4,000/- for the offence under Section 420 of
IPC and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 have
jointly submitted that certain cheques were also issued in connection
with the transaction involved in the present case and accordingly one
complaint case No.3310 of 2009 was filed by the opposite party No.2
namely L.N. Tiwary and he submits that in the case under Section 138
of N.I. Act, the case was compromised and while compromising the
case, there was also mention about the present case. Learned counsels
have also submitted that they are immediate neighbours. They have
submitted that the entire allegation in the present case is in the realm
of private dispute between the parties and accordingly they have filed
a joint compromise petition in the present case being I.A. No.5741 of
2021 on account of settlement out of the Court.
6. With the aforesaid background, it has been prayed by the
learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of joint compromise
petition filed in this case, the conviction and sentence of the petitioner
be set-aside.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a decision
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2021 SCC Online
SC 834 and referred to paragraph 13 thereof to submit that in a case
where the offences are pre-dominantly of a private nature, the same
can be annulled irrespective of the fact that the trial has already been
concluded and appeal stands dismissed against conviction.
8. Learned counsel submits that so far as the offence involved in
the present case are non-compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C.,
but they can be compounded with the permission. He also submits
that considering the nature of dispute between the parties, the present
case may be permitted to be compromised and in view of the
compromise, the conviction as well as the sentence of the petitioner
may be set-aside, so that the peace may resume between the parties.
9. The opposite party No.2 has no objection, if the present revision
is allowed as the dispute between the parties have already been
settled amongst them. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2
has further submitted that the conviction as well as the sentence of the
petitioner be set-aside.
10. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 has also consented
for the aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner.
11. Learned counsel for the State Mr. Suraj Verma has no objection
to the prayer made by the parties in I.A. No.5741 of 2021. During the
course of argument, he also submits that the dispute between the
parties is in the realm of the private dispute between the parties.
12. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering
the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds that the
allegation levelled in the present case appears to be in the nature of
private dispute between the parties. It appears that there was some
money transaction between the petitioner and the opposite party No.2
in order to secure admission of son of the opposite party No.2 which
was the genesis of the criminal case. It is not in dispute that both the
parties are immediate neighbours and they have also settled their case
in connection with section 138 of N.I. Act, mentioning about the
present case also and before this Court, they have filed joint
compromise petition.
13. Considering the totality and facts and circumstance of this case
and in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as
referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court finds
that in order to secure the ends of justice and also to secure peace
between the parties, who are immediate neighbours, the dispute
being in realm of the private dispute between the parties, the I.A.
No.5741 of 2021, is hereby allowed.
14. Consequently, the judgment of conviction as well as the
sentence passed by the learned trial court dated 26.08.2010 passed by
Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in G.R. Case No.2484
of 2008 (T.R. No.175 of 2010), and confirmed by the learned appellate
court in judgment dated 16.08.2012 passed by the learned Principal
Sessions Judge in Cr. Appeal No.195 of 2010 are hereby set-aside.
15. In view of the aforesaid findings, this Revision application is
hereby allowed.
16. Let the lower court records be sent back to the court concerned.
17. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through
email/ FAX.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
R.Kumar/
