Subdullah @ Shamsher Alam vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3445 Jhar

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         Cr. Revision No. 402 of 2016

         Subdullah @ Shamsher Alam ...            ...            Petitioner
                                     - Versus -
         1. The State of Jharkhand
         2. Pramod Kumar                     ... ...          Opposite Parties
                        ------

CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

-----

         For Petitioner     : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
         For the State      : A.P.P.

For the O.P. No. 2 : M/s. Anjani Kumar, Advocate

---

12/11.09.2023 Heard the parties.

Learned lawyer appearing on behalf of the petitioner has filed a Supplementary affidavit stating therein that he has compromised the case with the opposite party no. 2 and he has deposited Rs. 40,000/- before the learned court below on 12.04.2018.

Learned lawyer appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 also submitted that the parties have settled the dispute and the opposite party no. 2 has received Rs. 40,000/-.

The petitioner has filed this application against the judgment dated 01.02.2016, passed by Sri P. K. Srivastava, learned Session Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa (As his lordship was then) in Cr. Appeal No. 67 of 2015, whereby and wherein, the learned Session Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.09.2015, passed by Sri Rama Kant Mishra, learned C.J.M., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in connection with C/1 Case No. 19/2012, holding the petitioner guilty of offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act and thereby sentencing him to undergo R.I. for one year alongwith a fine of Rs. 40,000/- out of which Rs.30,000/- was ordered to be paid to the opposite party no. 2 as compensation, in default of payment of fine the petitioner was further sentenced to undergo additional imprisonment for one month.

The offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act is compoundable in nature. The parties have already settled the dispute.

Considering the aforesaid fact; the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.09.2015, passed by Sri Rama Kant Mishra, learned C.J.M., West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in connection with C/1 Case No. 19/2012, holding the petitioner guilty of offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act and the order of sentence is set aside.

This Criminal Revision application is allowed. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.

(Ambuj Nath, J.) Saurabh

Uploaded