Madhya Pradesh High Court
Uday Singh Rajput vs Roopesh Tomar on 8 March, 2025
Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh
Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh
1 CRR-340-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
LOK ADALAT
CRR No. 340 of 2025
(UDAY SINGH RAJPUT Vs ROOPESH TOMAR )
Dated : 08-03-2025
Shri R.A. Choubey - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Saket Upadhyay - Advocate for the respondent/Complainant.
By way of instant Revision Petition, the applicant has approached
before this Court challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence dated
24/08/2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore in Criminal
Appeal No.207/2019, by which the Appellate Court has affirmed the
judgement dated 27/07/2019 passed by the JMFC, Sehore in SCNIA
No.479/2018., whereby the applicant was connected for offence under
Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to under to R.I for 6
months and compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- with default stipulation.
It is contended by the counsel for the applicant that applicant and non-
applicant have entered into compromise without their being any threat or
coercion, and the entire amount has been paid to the complainant, therefore,
they do not wish to proceed against each other. Thus, they pray that
considering the compromise arrived at between them, the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence be set aside.
It is submitted that applicant is in Jail. Although suspension of
sentence was allowed on 11.02.2025, but since he could not deposit the fine
amount under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act of Rs.2,40,000/-,
2 CRR-340-2025
therefore he could not avail the facility of the order.
Having considered the submissions, perusal of record reflects that in
terms of the order dated 4.3.2025 parties appeared before the Joint Registrar
(J-II). Their statements have been recorded by the Joint Registrar (J-II) and
the parties have unequivocally submitted that the matter between them has
been compromised and the complainant has received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs) towards full and final settlement. The settlement has
been arrived at without there being any coercion, threat or undue pressure.
Since Shri Saket Upadhyay - Advocate for the
respondent/Complainant has no grievance, this National Lok Adalat deems it
proper to compound the offence in view of compromise arrived at between
the parties.
I.A. No.4726/2025, application for compounding of offence under
Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act R/w Section 359 of B.N.S.S. is
allowed.
In this regard, it is worth referring to decision in the case of
Damodardas S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H , (2010) 5 SCC 663 regarding
deposit of 15% compounding fee, this court is of the view that judgment of
conviction passed by both the courts be set aside subject to depositing 1% of
the cheque amount/entire amount i.e. Rs.2500/- as compounding fee in the
High Court Legal Service authority, Jabalpur. The revision is disposed of.
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence dated
24/08/2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore District Sehore in
Criminal Appeal No.207/2019 by which the Appellate Court has affirmed the
3 CRR-340-2025
judgement dated 27/07/2019 passed by JMFC, Sehore in SCNIA
No.479/2018 stand set aside. Since applicant is in jail be released.
Warrant issued against the applicant, if any, be recalled.
Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail authorities.
(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) (ADITYA SANGHI)
MEMBER MEMBER
NRJ
