Jagdish Kaiborta vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2146 Jhar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      Criminal Revision No. 321 of 2015

Jagdish Kaiborta s/o Ram Prasad Kaiborta, r/o village-Banksai, PO & PS-
Rajnagar, District-Saraikella(Khersawan)                 .... . Petitioner
                                  Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Binay Kumar Singhdeo s/o Mr. Baijnath Singhdeo, r/o village-Bila, PS-
Rajnagar, Dist.Seraikela, Kharsawan, at present r/o village-Banksai, PS-
Rajnagar, Dist-Seraikela Kharsawan                   ... Opposite Parties

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

For the Petitioner    : Mr. Sandip Kr. Barnwal, Advocate
For the State         : Mr.Tapas Roy, APP
For O.P No. 2         : Mr.Surajdeo Munda, Advocate
                               -------

th Order No. 10 /Dated: 10 June 2022

This criminal revision petition has been filed challenging the judgment dated 24th February 2015 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 40 of 2014 by which conviction and sentence of the petitioner as awarded to him in C/1 Complaint Case No. 21 of 2010 has been affirmed by the appellate Court.

2. The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to RI for one year with a fine of double the cheque amount under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

3. During pendency of the present criminal revision petition the matter was referred for mediation before JHALSA, Ranchi by an order dated 28 th August 2015.

4. A report of mediaton from JHALSA, Ranchi has been brought on record.

5. Mr. Sandip Kr. Barnwal, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now the matter has been amicably settled between the parties on the terms which were reduced before the Mediator, JHALSA, Ranchi.

6. In the above changed circumstance, the learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the judgment in "Sailesh Shyam Parsekar v. Baban alias Vishwanath S. Godge and Another" (2005) 4 SCC 162 to submit that the order of conviction and sentence passed in C/1 Complaint Case No. 21 of 2010 may be set aside.

7. Mr. Surajdeo Munda, the learned counsel for O.P No.2 affirms compromise between the parties and payment of Rs.3,50,000/- to O.P No.2.

8. The learned counsel for O.P No.2 does not dispute the proposition advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Sailesh Shyam Parsekar" case.

9. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances in the case, the order of conviction under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the order of sentence dated 24 th March 2014 passed in C/1 Complaint Case No. 21 of 2010 affirmed in the Criminal Appeal No. 40 of 2014 dated 24th February, 2014 are set aside.

10. Criminal Revision No. 321 of 2015 is allowed.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) sudhir