Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kailash Bhargav vs Prem Prakash Solanki ... on 13 December, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:43565]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1646/2023
Kailash Bhargav S/o M.l. Bhargav, Aged About 53 Years, B/c
Bhargav, R/o 112, Sindhi Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Prem Prakash Solanki S/o Daya Ram Solanki, B/c Sindhi, R/o
Ghanchiyo Ka Bas, Inside Jalori Gate, Jodhpur (Raj.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahipal Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
13/12/2023
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment
dated 16.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, No. Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Appeal No.18/2018,
by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the
judgment dated 31.01.2018 passed by the learned Judge
Metropolitan Magistrate, No.3 Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal
Case No.138/2013 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.50,000/-. In default
of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo three
months' simple imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
and complainant/respondent have entered into a compromise in
the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent has received all the
[2023:RJ-JD:43565] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1646/2023]
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.
Learned counsel for respondent concurs with the facts stated
by the counsel for the petitioner.
I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for
the parties.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant/
respondent 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 16.10.2023 and 31.01.2018 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
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
[2023:RJ-JD:43565] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1646/2023]
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 also stands decided
accordingly.
A copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal
Services Authority, Jodhpur.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
240-raksha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
