Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ismile Mohd vs Mansoor Ali And Anr. ... on 13 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:43564]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 282/2018
Ismile Mohd S/o Shri Gheesu Khan Mistri, R/o Diwanshah
Dargah Ke Piche, Kapasan Tehsil, Kapasan, District Chittorgarh.
At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Chittorgarh
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Mansoor Ali S/o Shri Shahmat Ali Musalman, R/o 61-C,
Gandhi Nagar, Chittorgarh.
2. State Of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Charan
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anita Gehlot, PP
Mr. B.S. Charan, for respondent No.1
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
13/12/2023
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment
dated 08.02.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge No.1, Chittorgarh, in Criminal Appeal No.05/2017 vide
which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the
judgment dated 20.12.2016 passed by the learned Addl. Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh, in Criminal Case No.776/2011
convicting and sentencing the petitioner for offence under Section
138 N.I. Act has been affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to
undergo one year's simple imprisonment along with fine in the
sum of Rs.1,10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further
undergo two months' Simple imprisonment, it was also directed
that out of total fine amount Rs.90,000/- be paid to the
[2023:RJ-JD:43564] (2 of 3) [CRLR-282/2018]
complainant as compensation, after expiry of limitation for
preferring the appeal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
and complainant-respondent No.1 have entered into a compromise
in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.1 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
16.02.2018 arrived in between the parties is placed on record.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 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 16.02.2018 .
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant
respondent No.1 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
[2023:RJ-JD:43564] (3 of 3) [CRLR-282/2018]
vide judgment dated 08.02.2018 and 20.12.2016 are 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
deposited by the petitioner before the Rajasthan State Legal
Services Authority, Jodhpur within a period of one month from
today. In case, the cost is not deposited by the petitioner before
the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur 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.
Suspension of Sentence application is already decided.
Copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal
Services Authority, Jodhpur.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
132-Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
