Uttarakhand High Court
Satendra Kumar Alias Neetu vs State Of Uttarakhand And on 19 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION NO.564 OF 2023
Satendra Kumar alias Neetu .....Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and .....Respondents
Another
Counsel for the Revisionist : Mr. Mehboob Rahi,
Advocate with Mr. Vishal
Kumar Nautiyal, Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Ram Nivas Singh Rana,
No.2 Advocate.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
Proposed Criminal Revision has been filed against
judgment dated 02.08.2022, passed by learned IVth Additional
Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No.161 of 2017,
by which, the Appeal, filed against the judgment dated
08.11.2017, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Laksar, District Haridwar in Complaint Case No.541
of 2014, "Sumer Chand vs. Satendra Kumar alias Neetu", by
which the revisionist was convicted and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year along with a
compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty
Thousand) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881, has been dismissed.
2. Present Revision has been filed along with an
Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to
condone the delay of 277 days in preferring the Revision.
3. Heard Mr. Mehboob Rahi with Mr. Vishal Kumar
Nautiyal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Mr. Ram Nivas
Singh Rana, learned counsel for the respondent no.2-
complainant.
4. Delay Condonation Application (IA No.1 of 2023) has
not been opposed by the respondent no.2. Delay Condonation
Application (IA No.1 of 2023) is allowed. Delay of 277 days in
preferring the present revision is condoned.
5. Mr. Mehboob Rahi, learned counsel for the revisionist
submits that revisionist is in District Jail, Roshnabad, Haridwar.
6. Sumer Chand, respondent no.2/complainant is
present in-person. He is identified by Mr. Ram Nivas Singh
Rana, Advocate. Sumer Chand, respondent no.2 submits that
he has received entire amount from the revisionist-accused. He
has compounded the offence and accordingly a compromise
application along with affidavits has been filed. Respondent
no.2 further submits that he has filed the compromise
application and affidavits with his free will and without any
pressure.
7. Mr. Mehboob Rahi, Advocate submits that he has
deposited Rs.22,500/- (15% of the cheque amount) with the
Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority. He has filed a
Receipt No.18 dated 19.09.2023. The said Receipt is taken on
record.
8. Both the parties have requested to decide the
present revision on the basis of compromise.
9. With the consent of both the parties, present
Criminal Revision (CRLR No.564 of 2023) is allowed by holding
that since the offence has been compounded, the revisionist is
entitled to acquittal. Consequently, judgment dated
02.08.2022, passed by learned Appellate Court and judgment
dated 08.11.2017, passed by learned Trial Court are set aside.
Revisionist-Satendra Kumar alias Neetu is ordered to be
acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881.
10. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment
to the Superintendent of District Jail, Haridwar for necessary
compliance.
___________________
Dt: 19.09.2023 ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
JKJ/Pant
