Jharkhand High Court
Sri Niwas Rao @ M. Niwas Rao vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 1534 of 2016
with
I.A. No.985 of 2019
Sri Niwas Rao @ M. Niwas Rao ... Petitioner
- Versus -
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-----
For Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate
: Mr. Chanchal Jain, Advocate
: Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Binit Chandra, Advocate
---
07/30.08.2023
Head the parties.
The petitioner has filed this revision application against the
judgment and order dated 06.09.2016, passed by Sri Subhash, learned
Additional Sessions Judge-V, Jamshedpur in Criminal Appeal No.61 of
2015, whereby and wherein the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V,
Jamshedpur partly allowed of the appeal of the petitioner, while setting
aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence under Section 406
of the Indian Penal Code but upholding the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence offences under Sections 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal
Code dated 06.05.2015, passed by Sri Manoj Kumar Tripathi, learned
J.M., 1st Class, Jamshedpur in G.R. Case No.1948 of 2002 arising out of
Bistupur P.S. Case No.217 of 2002 holding the petitioner guilty of
offences under Sections 418, 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and
thereby sentencing him to undergo R.I. for one year for offence under
Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for two years alongwith
fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code
and in default of payment of fine petitioner was further directed to
undergo S.I. for fifteen days and R.I. for two years for offence under
Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were ordered to
run- concurrently.
The prosecution case was instituted on the basis complaint made by
computer trainees, who were taking training in the institute of the
petitioner stating therein that he had realised Rs.26,520/- from each of
them for training them but did not complete the course. They had made a
complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum,
Jamshedpur. On the basis of their complaint the present case was
instituted.
Joint compromise petition has been filed vide I.A. No.985 of 2019
informing that the petitioner and the victims have compromised the case
and the entire amount so realised from the victims has been returned back
to them.
Mr. Binit Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
victims submitted that the matter between the parties have been settled
and the victims does not want to pursue the case.
From the perusal of provision under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. it
appears that offences under Sections 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal
Code are compoundable in nature.
Considering the aforesaid provision of law, the parties are allowed
to compromise the case at this stage.
In view of the aforesaid facts, where the parties have compromised
the case, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the
learned Trial Court is set aside.
This Criminal Revision Application is allowed.
I.A. No.985 of 2019 is also disposed of.
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
Jay/-
