Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Trilok Singh vs Rameshwar Lal And Anr. ... on 7 May, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:22010]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 811/2007
Trilok Singh S/o Sujan Singh, aged about 42 years, Proprietor of
Chhabra Traders, R/o 104, Sindhi Colony, Pratap Nagar,
Chittorgarh. At present R/o House No. A-3, Pratap Nagar,
Chittorgarh, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Rameshwar Lal S/o Onkarlal Menariya, R/o Vana Police
Station, Kheroda, Dist. Udaipur.
2. State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.S. Jodha
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain, Sr. Advocate assisted
by Mr. H.S. Rathore
Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
07/05/2025
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment
dated 26.06.2007 passed by the learned Additional District &
Sessions Judge No.2, Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No.08/2006 by
which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the
judgment dated 12.11.2005 passed by the learned Additional
Munsif & Judicial Magistrate (S.D.), Vallabhnagar, District Udaipur
in Crl. Case No.256/2003 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.70,000/- in default
of payment of fine, to further undergo one month's S.I.
[2025:RJ-JD:22010] (2 of 3) [CRLR-811/2007]
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 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 deed.
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,
the matter is decided 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
[2025:RJ-JD:22010] (3 of 3) [CRLR-811/2007]
vide judgments dated 26.06.2007 and 12.11.2005 are hereby set
aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise.
The revision petition is allowed in the above terms.
Suspension of sentence application also stands decided
accordingly.
Record of the courts below be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
23-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
