Rajkumar Arora vs Satish Gulati
2022 Latest Caselaw 4000 UK

  HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

             Criminal Revision No. 280 of 2021
                            With
            Compounding Application IA No. 3 of 2022

RajKumar Arora                                       ...Revisionist

                                 Versus

Satish Gulati                                        ...Respondent


Present:-
            Mr. Prateek Tripathi, Advocate for the revisionist.
            Mr. Maneesh Bisht, Advocate for the respondent.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this revision is made to the

followings:-

(i) The judgment and order dated 29.02.2020,

passed in Criminal Case No. 2888 of 2017,

Satish Gulati Vs. Rajkumar Arora, by the

court of Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge

(Junior Division), Kashipur, District

Udham Singh Nagar ("the case"). By it, the

revisionist has been convicted under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881 ("the Act") and sentenced to six

months' simple imprisonment with a fine

of Rs. 1,03,000/-. In default of payment of

fine, the revisionist shall undergo for a

further period of two months' simple

imprisonment. And;

(ii) The judgment and order dated 12.10.2021,

passed in Criminal Appeal No. 164 of

2020, Rajkumar Arora Vs. Satish Gulati,

by the court of First Additional Sessions

Judge, Kashipur, District Udham Singh

Nagar. By it, judgment and order passed

in the case has been confirmed.

2. The revisionist and the complainant have filed a

joint Compounding Application No. 3 of 2022 alongwith the

affidavits.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the record.

4. Learned counsel for the parties would submit that

the parties have amicably settled the dispute; 15% of the

cheque amount has been deposited, as required to be

deposited in such cases, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed

Babalal H.,(2010) 5 SCC 663.

5. Today, the revisionist and the respondent both

joined the proceedings of the Court through video conferencing,

as identified by their respective counsel.

6. Both the parties have accepted the compromise. The

Court particularly asked the respondent, who is the

complainant in the case. He would submit that he has settled

the dispute. He has received the entire money.

7. Since the revisionist and the complainant have

settled the dispute, the offence under Section 138 of the Act

gets compounded. Consequently, the revisionist is entitled to

acquittal.

8. Accordingly, the revision is allowed.

9. The impugned judgments and orders are set

aside. The revisionist is acquitted of the charge under

Section 138 of the Act.

10. Let the lower court record, along with a copy of

this judgment be sent back to the court concerned.

11. The Compounding Application IA No.3 of 2022

stands disposed of, accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 13.12.2022 Ravi Bisht