Bhanwar Singh Chandana vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9661 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 463/2021

Bhanwar Singh Chandana S/o Sh. Parig Singh Chandna, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Bhutala, Asrota Ki Bhagal, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Ram Singh Gaur S/o Sh. Mod Singh Gaur, Proprietor Jai Bholenath Transport Company Losing, Tehsil Girwa, Dist. Udaipur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Ram Singh Rawal, Adv. through
                                VC
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Sudhir Tak, PP
                                Mr. Praveen Bhati, Adv. through VC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG (VACATION JUDGE)

Judgment / Order

02/06/2021

This revision petition has been filed against the judgment

dated 18.02.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge (Woman Atrocities Cases), Udaipur in Criminal Appeal

No.43/2013 (CIS No.1206/2015), vide which, the appeal filed by

the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment dated 19.06.2013

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

No.1, Udaipur in Criminal Regular Case No.5288/2009 convicting

and sentencing the petitioner for offence under Section 138 N.I.

Act has been affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo

three months' simple imprisonment along with fine of

Rs.1,50,000/-.

(2 of 3) [CRLR-463/2021]

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

and complainant-respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise

in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.2 has received all

the amount from the petitioner and does not want to proceed with

the matter, therefore the sentence of imprisonment awarded to

the petitioner may be set aside. The copy of compromise dated

30.03.2021 is already available on record.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 concurs with the facts

stated by the counsel for the petitioner.

I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for

the parties and perused the compromise dated 30.03.2021 .

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,

since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant

respondent No.2 has accepted the sum towards full and final

settlement of dispute on the satisfaction of the complainant and in

the light of provisions of Section 147 of NI Act and in view of law

laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S.

Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663, the

sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138

NI Act is liable to be set aside. However, since the compromise has

been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the

petitioner, a cost of 15% of the cheque amount deserves to be

imposed upon the petitioner in light of the decision rendered by

the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra).

Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment

awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act

vide judgment dated 18.02.2015 and 19.06.2013 is hereby set

aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to

deposition of cost of 15% of the cheque amount. The cost shall be

(3 of 3) [CRLR-463/2021]

deposited by the petitioner before the Legal Services Authority,

Jodhpur within a period of 20 days from today. In case, the cost is

not deposited by the petitioner before the Legal Services Authority

within the stipulated period, the revision petition may be listed

before this Court for passing appropriate orders.

The revision petition is allowed in the above terms.

Application for suspension of sentence and application under

Section 5 of Limitation Act are also decided accordingly.

A copy of this order be sent to the Legal Services Authority

Jodhpur.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG), VJ 66-MS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)