Jharkhand High Court
Sushil Kumar Khemka vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 August, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
2025:JHHC:22451
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No.530 of 2020
Sushil Kumar Khemka, aged about 57 years, son of Bhadar Mal
Khemka, Resident of - 145, New Baradwari, Sakchi, Jamshedpur, P.O. -
Sakchi, P.S. - Sitaramdera, District- East Singhbhum
...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The state of Jharkhand
2. Om Prakash Dubey, Son of Jamuna Dubey, Resident of House
No.112, Road No.4, Jawahar Nagar, Jamshedpur, P.O. - Jawahar
Nagar, P.S. Mango, District - East Singhbhum
..... ... Opp. Parties
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amitabh Prasad, Advocate
Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, Advocate
For the Opp. Parties : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, Addl. PP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Advocate
------
24/07.08.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the
State and learned counsel appearing for O.P. No.2.
2. This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the judgment
and order of conviction and sentence dated 14.11.2019 passed by
learned Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, in Cr.
Appeal No.177 of 2019, whereby the learned Appellate Court has
been pleased to allow the appeal in part by acquitting the petitioner
for the charge u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and awarded
punishment of simple imprisonment of one year and also ordered to
pay compensation amount of Rs. 34,40,000/- (Thirty-Four Lakhs
Forty Thousand) to the complainant preferably within a month.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is
arising out of dishonour of the cheque, for which a complaint case
has been filed.
4. He further submits that the matter was sent for settlement by a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 25.11.2022 and in the
mediation, both the parties have settled the dispute and have agreed
to pay a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- to the complainant as full and final
settlement, and in turn the complainant has agreed to withdraw all
the pending cases filed by the complainant.
5. He submits that a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- has already been paid
to the complainant and the remaining Rs.1,00,000/-, he is paying to
the counsel for the complainant right now. He submits, in view of
that, the case may be quashed.
6. Learned counsel for the State submits that this is case between
the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 for non-payment of
amount and dishonour of the cheque.
7. Learned counsel Mr. Upadhyay appearing for the O.P. No.2
accepts the submission and submits that the complainant has already
received Rs.17,00,000/- and by way of receiving of bank draft of
Rs.1,00,000/- today, the entire transaction is complete in terms of the
settlement made before JHALSA. He submits that now the
complainant has got no grievance and in view that, matter may be
closed.
8. In light of the above submissions of the learned counsel
appearing for the parties and further considering that the matter is
arising out of Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and that
section is compoundable in the light of Section 320(6) of the Cr.P.C.
9. As such, this case is allowed to be compounded in the light of
Section 320(6) of the Cr.P.C.
10. Accordingly, this Cr. Revision is allowed in above terms and
disposed of.
11. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
R.Kumar
