Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mangi Lal vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 March, 2021
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 221/2021
Mangi Lal S/o Bheru Lal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Chanda
Colony Ankit School Ke Pass Bedvas, Tehsil Girva, District
Udaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan
2. Ram Narayan S/o Shankar Lal, R/o Chandra Colony
Bedvas Dhikli Road, Tehsil Girva, District Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Jitendra Ojha, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.S.Rajpurohit, PP
Mr.L.K.Ramdhari, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
15/03/2021
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment
dated 10.12.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge No.5, Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No.19/2017 (CIS
No.233/2017), vide which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was
dismissed and the judgment dated 15.02.2017 passed by the
learned Special Judge (N.I. Act Cases) No.2, Udaipur in Criminal
Case No.736/2015 convicting and sentencing the petitioner for
offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed. The
petitioner was sentenced to undergo six months simple
imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation
to the complainant.
(2 of 3) [CRLR-221/2021]
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 compromise dated
25.02.2021 arrived in between the parties is placed 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 03.07.2019 .
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 10.12.2020 and 15.02.20217 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-221/2021]
deposited by the petitioner before the Legal Services Authority,
Jodhpur within a period of 15 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. Stay
petition also stands decided accordingly.
Copy of this order be supplied to the Legal Services
Authority, Jodhpur.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
161-NK/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
