Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gulab vs Prakash Chandra (2024:Rj-Jd:9753) on 26 February, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:9753]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 297/2024
Gulab S/o Shri Joru Kumawat, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Gadrikheda, Koshithal, Police Station Gangapur, District Bhilwara.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Prakash Chandra S/o Shri Lehru Lal Ojha, R/o Galwa,
Police Station Raipur, District Bhilwara.
2. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pareek
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Rajpurohit, for
respondent No.1
Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
26/02/2024
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment
dated 13.02.2024 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge
Gangapur, District Bhilwara, in Criminal Appeal No.03/2022
whereby the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed and the
judgment dated 05.05.2022 passed by the learned Special Judicial
Magistrate, NI Act Cases, Raipur, District Bhilwara, for offence
under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed and the petitioner
sentenced to undergo six months' simple imprisonment along with
fine in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency
of the revision petition, the petitioner and complainant-respondent
No.1 has entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat and
the respondent No.1 has received all the amount from the
[2024:RJ-JD:9753] (2 of 3) [CRLR-297/2024]
petitioner and does not want to proceed in the matter. It is stated
that since the parties have entered into compromise and amicably
settled their dispute, therefore, the sentence of imprisonment
awarded to the petitioner may be set aside.
Counsel for the respondent No.1 concurs the fact of
compromise arrived at between the parties.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
since the parties have settled the dispute and complainant
respondent No.2 has received the sum towards full and final
settlement of dispute on the satisfaction of the complainant,
therefore, in the light of provisions contained in Section 147 of NI
Act, so also 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 the 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 judgments dated 05.05.2022 and 13.02.2024 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 with the Rajasthan State Legal
Services Authority, Jodhpur within a period of two months from
today. In case the cost of 15% of the cheque amount is not
[2024:RJ-JD:9753] (3 of 3) [CRLR-297/2024]
deposited by the petitioner within the stipulated period, the
revision petition may be listed before this Court for passing
appropriate orders.
The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. Suspension
of sentence application is also decided.
A copy of this order be sent to the office of Legal Services
Authority at Jodhpur.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
205-Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
