[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Kamaljeet Kaur vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 December, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
2025:JHHC:37700
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
Criminal Revision No. 979 of 2022
----
Kamaljeet Kaur, aged about 67 years, wife of Harjeet Singh, R/o
H. No.201, D, Road, Sonari Jamshedpur, PO and PS - Sonari,
District - East Singhbhum, State - Jharkhand
.... Petitioner
-- Versus --
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Jayesh Ashok Thankey, son of Late Ashok Kumar M. Thankey, R/o
H. No.19, New Baradwari, Sakchi, PO and PS - Sakchi, Town
Jamshedpur, District - East Singhbhum, Jharkhand
.... Opposite Parties
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioner :- Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. V.S. Sahay, Advocate
For O.P. No.2 :- Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate
----
07/16.12.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned
counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the
opposite party No.2.
2. This petition has been filed against the judgment dated
25.04.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at
Jamshedpur in Criminal Appeal No.108 of 2018 whereby the learned
Sessions Judge has been pleased to dismiss the appeal preferred by the
petitioner and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 22.03.2018 passed by learned J.M.F.C., Jamshedpur in C/1 Case
No.210 of 2013 (T.R. No.211/2018) whereby the learned Trial Court has
been pleased to hold guilty and convict the petitioner to undergo S.I. for
two months for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable
--1-- Criminal Revision No. 979 of 2022
2025:JHHC:37700
Instruments Act and ordered to pay a fine of Rs.14,00,000/-.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that now a
good sense has prevailed between the parties and compromise has taken
place and the settlement has been arrived at Rs.10,00,000/-. She further
submits in view of that I.A. No.8302 of 2022 has been filed for
compromise. She then submits that the matter is arising under Section
138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and that can be compoundable in light
of Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act. She next submits that
arising out of the same complaint two of the accused persons have
preferred Criminal Revision No.976 of 2022 and 978 of 2022 and the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court has allowed the said compromise by order
dated 31st March, 2023 and 12th November, 2022 respectively.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the matter
is compromised and the matter is arising under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 accepts
the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
submits that the matter has been compromised at Rs.10,00,000/- and in
view of that settlement agreement is also annexed along with the I.A.
meant for compromise. He submits in view of that the matter can be
disposed of.
6. In light of above submission of learned counsel appearing for
the parties and further considering that the matter is arising under
Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act which is compoundable under
Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act and both the parties have
--2-- Criminal Revision No. 979 of 2022
2025:JHHC:37700
compromised the matter and in view of that the prayer made in the I.A.,
meant for compromise, is hereby allowed.
7. Reference may be made to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of New Win Export and Another versus A.
Subramaniam reported in (2024) SCC OnLine SC 1741, wherein at
paragraph Nos.6 and 7 it has been held as under :-
"6. At this juncture, we would also like to reiterate a few
words regarding the principles of compounding of
offences in the context of NI Act. It is to be remembered
that dishonour of cheques is a regulatory offence which
was made an offence only in view of public interest so
that the reliability of these instruments can be ensured. A
large number of cases involving dishonour of cheques are
pending before courts which is a serious concern for our
judicial system. Keeping in mind that the 'compensatory
aspect' of remedy shall have priority over the 'punitive
aspect', courts should encourage compounding of
offences under the NI Act if parties are willing to do so.
(See : Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5
SCC 6631 , Gimpex Private Limited v. Manoj Goel (2022)
11 SCC 7052 , Meters And Instruments Private Limited v.
Kanchan Mehta (2018) 1 SCC 5603)
7. In Raj Reddy Kallem v. The State of Haryana [2024] 5
SCR 203, this Court followed the same principles and
quashed a conviction under the NI Act, by invoking its
powers under Article 142, even though the complainant
therein declined to give consent for compounding,
observing that the accused has sufficiently compensated
the complainant."
8. In view of the above and considering the compromise between
the parties, I.A. No.8302 of 2022 meant for joint compromise petition is
allowed and disposed of and the case is allowed to be compounded
--3-- Criminal Revision No. 979 of 2022
2025:JHHC:37700
between the parties.
9. In view of the above, the petitioner is acquitted by setting aside
the judgment dated 25.04.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, East
Singhbhum at Jamshedpur in Criminal Appeal No.108 of 2018 and
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.03.2018 passed
by learned J.M.F.C., Jamshedpur in C/1 Case No.210 of 2013 (T.R.
No.211/2018).
10. The petitioner shall immediately put at liberty, as such this
Criminal Revision Petition is hereby allowed and disposed of.
11. Pending petition, if any, are also disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Dated 16.12.2025
Sangam/
Uploaded on
--4-- Criminal Revision No. 979 of 2022
