Gautam [email protected] vs State Of Tripura
2021 Latest Caselaw 75 Tri

                           Page 1 of 3




              HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                    AGARTALA

                    IA No.03 of 2020
               in Crl.Rev.P.No.37 of 2019

Gautam [email protected]                 ...................Petitioner(s)

                            Versus

State of Tripura               ....................Respondent(s)

For the Applicant(s)                : Mr. S.Lodh, Adv.

For the Respondent(s)               : Mr. Ratan Datta, PP.
                                      Mr. B.Pal, Adv.


                        BEFORE

      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G CHATTOPADHYAY

                        ORDER

15.01.2021

[1] Heard Mr.S.Lodh, learned counsel representing the convict petitioner. Also heard Mr.B.Pal, learned counsel representing the complainant respondent. Mr.Ratan Datta, learned PP is appearing for the State respondent.

[2] The parties to the case have jointly filed this petition under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981(NI Act for short) for permission of the court for compounding the offence.

[3] Facts of the case are that the convict petitioner had taken a loan of Rs.5,50,000/- from the complainant

respondent and later when he issued a cheque towards the repayment of the loan, the cheque was dishonoured by the bank for insufficiency of fund in his account and therefore, the complainant respondent prosecuted him under Section 138 of the NI Act. The trial court after recording evidence and hearing the parties, convicted the accused petitioner sentenced him to a fine of Rs.7,00,000/-. The convict petitioner filed an appeal against the judgment of the learned trial court in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge at Agartala who admitted the appeal subject to deposit of 20% of the fine in terms of Section 148 of the NI Act. The convict petitioner having failed to deposit the amount, the appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 07.12.2018. Challenging this order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the revision petitioner approached this court by filing the present criminal revision petition.

[4] Pursuant to the direction of this court vide order in IA 3 of 2020 dated 18.12.2020, the convict petitioner as well as the complainant respondent has appeared before this court in person. The parties have been identified by their respective counsel.

[5] The complainant respondent has stated that he has settled the matter amicably with the convict petitioner. Such settlement is permissible under Section 147 of the NI Act.

[6] As the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, the petition is disposed of accordingly.

Since the offence has been compounded, it will have the effect of acquittal of the convict in terms of sub- section(8) of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

JUDGE

Saikat Sarma