Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ishak Khan vs State Of Rajasthan on 17 August, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 581/2022
Ishak Khan S/o Deene Khan, Aged About 42 Years, B/c Mangliya
Musalman, R/o Opp. Upnivesan Teh. Mohangarh, Dist. Jaisalmer
(Raj.). (Judicial Custody In Jaisalmer Jail)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Loon Singh S/o Sh. Idan Singh, B/c Rajpurohit, R/o
Ghewda, P.s. Mathaniya, Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhagirath Ray Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek PUrohit, AGA
Mr. SK Verma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
17/08/2023
The petitioner has approached this Court for challenging the
judgment dated 19.5.2022 passed by the learned District &
Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer (Raj.) in Cr. Appeal No. 24/2019
affirming the judgment dated 04.5.2019 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Jaisalmer, in Cr. Case No. 713/2015 whereby,
the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act and was sentenced to one year six
months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 30,00,000/-and in
default of fine further conviction & Imprisonment of Six months
2. Briefly stated, that facts of the case are that the petitioner
was prosecuted for committing an offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act. After completion of trial, he was
(2 of 3) [CRLR-581/2022]
found guilty and thus, was convicted and sentenced by the learned
trial Court. The judgment of conviction was assailed by the
petitioner by way of filing a criminal appeal but the same has been
dismissed vide judgment dated 19.5.2022, hence the present
revision petition has been filed.
3. The parties have entered into a compromise and have settled
the dispute amicably. Copy of Compromise deed dated 08.9.2022
has been placed on record. Parties have resolved the dispute since
the petitioner has paid the due amount satisfying the respondent-
claimant. As per Section 147 of the N.I. Act, an offence under
Section 138 of the N.I. Act is compoundable without taking
permission of the court. Thus, it is jointly prayed that the
judgment of conviction as well as the order of appeal be quashed
and set aside.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material
available on record and gone through both the judgments as well
as the compromise deed wherein it is recited that the parties have
resolved their dispute amicably and the complainant does not wish
to continue the proceedings.
5. Since the precious time of the court has been wasted in the
entire criminal proceedings and now, the parties have arrived at a
compromise at a belated stage, therefore, it is deemed
appropriate to impose cost of proceedings upon the accused.
6. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties
and the statutory provision in this regard, the revision petition is
allowed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
(3 of 3) [CRLR-581/2022]
04.5.2019Judicial Magistrate, Jaisalmer in Criminal Case
No.713/2015 and the judgment in appeal dated 19.5.2022 passed
by the learned District & Sessions Judge Jaisalmer in Cr. Appeal
No.24/2019 are quashed and set aside. The accused is acquitted
from the charges.
7. The bail bonds of the petitioner are discharged.
8. The stay petition is also disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
197-1/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
