Bimal Singh Thapa vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 1258 UK

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                NAINITAL

              Criminal Revision No. 277 of 2023


Bimal Singh Thapa
S/o Shri Bishan Singh                              ......Revisionist

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand & another                    ........Respondents
Present:- Mr. Vikas Bahuguna, Advocate for the revisionist appeared
         through Video Conferencing.
         Mr. V.S. Rathore, learned A.G.A. for the State.
         Mr. Prashant Khanna, Advocate for complainant/respondent
         no.2 appeared through Video Conferencing


Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this revision is made to the

following:-

(i) Order dated 21.05.2018, passed by the court

of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

4th, Dehradun in Criminal Complaint/Case No.

1304 of 2012, Rashmi Sharma vs. Bimal Singh

Thapa, which relates for the offence punishable

under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act 188, Police Station Kotwali

Dehradun, District Dehradun, and

(ii) The judgment and order dated 27.10.2018,

passed by the court of Additional Sessions

Judge 1st, Dehradun District Dehradun in

Criminal Appeal No. 71 of 2018. By it, the

appeal has been dismissed.

3. The revisionist and the complainant have filed

a joint Compounding Application No. 2 of 2023 alongwith

their respective affidavits.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the material available on file.

5. 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.

6. Today, the complainant/respondent no.2

joined the proceedings of the Court through Video

Conferencing, as identified by her respective counsel.

7. Both the parties have accepted the

compromise. The Court particularly asked the

complainant/respondent no.2, who is the complainant in

the case, who would submit that she has settled the

dispute with the revisionist as she has received the entire

money.

8. 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 from the charges as levelled against

him in the present case.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision is

allowed. The orders, under challenge, are set aside. The

revisionist is acquitted of the charge punishable under

Section 138 of the Act.

9. The Compounding Application IA No.2 of 2023

stands disposed of, accordingly .

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) 04.05.2023 Mamta