Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh Bangar vs Hiral Jain (2023:Rj-Jd:38652) on 8 November, 2023
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023:RJ-JD:38652]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1531/2023
Dinesh Bangar S/o Jamnalal Bangar, Aged About 65 Years, R/o
6/28, Kashipuri, Bhilwara (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Hiral Jain S/o Ashok Kathed, R/o 114, Kashipuri, Bhilwara
(Rajasthan).
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nikhil Ajmera
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anita Gehlot, PP
Mr. Ravindra Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
08/11/2023
An application (Inward No.01/23) has been filed under
Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is
hereby allowed.
Delay in filing revision petition is hereby condoned.
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment
dated 24.09.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
Cases, Bhilwara in Criminal Appeal No.33/2019, by which, the
appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment
dated 17.11.2017 passed by the learned Special Judicial
Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.1, Bhilwara in Criminal Original
Case No.856/2015 convicting and sentencing the petitioner for
offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed. The
[2023:RJ-JD:38652] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1531/2023]
petitioner was sentenced to undergo one year's simple
imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. In
default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to
undergo fifteen days simple imprisonment.
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 copy of the compromise
dated 31.10.2023 is already 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 31.10.2023.
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 20% 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).
[2023:RJ-JD:38652] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1531/2023]
Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment
awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act
vide judgment dated 24.09.2019 and 17.11.2017 is hereby set
aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to
deposition of cost of 20% 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 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 stands decided accordingly.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
270-raksha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
