Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Neeraj Rajput vs Santosh Kumar ... on 8 May, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2023/RJJD/014099]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 326/2020
Neeraj Rajput S/o Sh. Gauri Shankar Rajput, Aged About 38
Years, R/o C/o Gautam Ji Khokhawat 01, Vardhman Complex
Kubha Nagar, Hiran Magri, Sector No. -4, Udaipur (Raj.).
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Santosh Kumar S/o Shri Tej Shankar Sharma, R/o 265,
Bapu Bazar, Anand Vishrathi Grah, Distt. Udaipur. (Raj.)
2. State, Through PP
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Rawal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gourav Singh, AGA
Mr. Praveen Bhati
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
08/05/2023
1. The petitioner has approached this Court for challenging the
judgment dated 04.02.2016 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Act), Udaipur in Criminal
Appeal No.53/2015 (CIS No. 1249/2015) affirming the
judgment dated 05.12.2014 passed by the learned Special
Judicial Magistrate (NI Act Cases) No. 1, Udaipur in Regular
Criminal Case No.1125/2012 whereby, the petitioner was
convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act and was sentenced to three
months simple imprisonment and further ordered to pay
compensation to the tune of Rs.35,000/- to the complainant.
[2023/RJJD/014099] (2 of 3) [CRLR-326/2020]
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 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
04.02.2016, 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 25.02.2020 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. 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 05.12.2014 passed by the learned Special
[2023/RJJD/014099] (3 of 3) [CRLR-326/2020]
Judicial Magistrate (NI Act Cases) No. 1, Udaipur in Regular
Criminal Case No.1125/2012 and the judgment in appeal
dated 04.02.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge (Women Atrocities Act), Udaipur in Cr. Appeal
No.53/2015 (CIS No. 1249/2015) are quashed and set aside.
The accused is acquitted from the charges.
6. The bail bonds of the petitioner are discharged.
7. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
145-Ashutosh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
