Anmol Handlooms vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 1347 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

           S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 164/2021

1.     Anmol Handlooms, Through Proprietor Anil Agarwal S/o
       Prahlad Agarwal R/o Mahadeva Complex Churi Market
       Alwar
2.     Anil Agarwal S/o Prahlad Agarwal, Aged About 52 Years,
       R/o    69,   South     West Block District               Alwar   (Accused
       Petitioner Is In Jail Alwar)
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Pubic Prosecutor
2.     Subhash Chand Gupta S/o Gopal Sahai Gupta, R/o
       Kallupara Alwar
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP Ms. Sweta Soni, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

08/02/2021

S.B. Criminal Misc. Application No.65/2021:-

Heard.

Application is allowed for the reasons stated therein.

Delay in filing the revision petition is condoned.

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 164/2021:-

This revision petition has been filed against the impugned

judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.03.2019

passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases)

No.2, Alwar (Raj.) in Criminal Case No.23/294/2017 whereby the

accused petitioners were convicted for the offence under Section

(2 of 2) [CRLR-164/2021]

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short "N.I. Act") for one

year Simple Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.4,50,000/- in default

of payment of fine two months additional Simple Imprisonment

was given and confirming the aforesaid judgment and order vide

order dated 01.02.2020 passed by the learned District & Sessions

Judge No.3, Alwar in Criminal Appeal No.41/2019 (90/19).

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

4. It is submitted that a compromise has been arrived at

between the parties and in lieu thereof, petitioner has paid the

entire amount to complainant as per compromise and there is

nothing to recover from the accused petitioner. The compromise

has been filed which is taken on record. So, the revision petition

may be allowed.

5. Hence, in view of the above, the revision petition deserves to

be decided in the light of compromise entered between the parties

as per Section 138 of N.I. Act. Amount has been paid to

complainant-respondent No.2 Subhash Chand Gupta as per

agreement.

6. The revision petition preferred by the petitioners is allowed.

The conviction of the petitioners as ordered by the trial court and

confirmed by the Appellate Court is quashed and set aside. The

petitioners are acquitted of the charges framed against them.

Petitioners who are in custody, be set at liberty forthwith, if not

required in any other case.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Jatin /157

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)