Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 2718 (RAJ)

Mahaveer v. State of Rajasthan

2005-10-19

H.R.PANWAR

body2005
Judgment H.R. Panwar, J.-This Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code") is directed against the Judgment and order dated 16.08.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gulabpura, district Bhilwara (for short, "the Appellate Court" hereinafter) in Criminal Appeal No. 8/2004, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the Judgment and order dated 30.01.2004 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gulabpura (for short, "the trial Court" hereinafter) in Criminal Case No. 169/2001, by which the trial Court convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, "the Act") and sentenced him to undergo two months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 67,000/-and in default of payment of fine further to undergo two months simple imprisonment. 2. Complainant-respondent No. 2 Gyan Chand appeared before this Court and filed an application seeking permission to compound the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. The Complainant-respondent No. 2 has also filed a compromise. The compromise has been verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court today. The complainant has been identified by his Counsel Mr. Chaitaniya Gehlot. 3. The offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act is compoundable under Section 147 of the Act. Section 147 of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable. 4. Section 320 of the Code provides compounding of the offence. Sub-section (6) of Section 320 of the Code provides that a High Court or Court of Session acting in the exercise of its powers of revision under Section 401 may allow any person to compound any offence which such person is competent to compound under this section. Sub-section (8) of Section 320 of the Code provides that the composition of an offence under this section shall have an effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid provisions of law, the Complainant-respondent No. 2 is permitted to compound the offence. He has compounded the offence by filing a compromise which has been verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. 6. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid provisions of law, the Complainant-respondent No. 2 is permitted to compound the offence. He has compounded the offence by filing a compromise which has been verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. 6. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned Judgment and order dated 16.08.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gulabpura, district Bhilwara in Criminal Appeal No. 8/2004, as also the Judgment and order dated 30.01.2004 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gulabpura in Criminal Case No. 169/2001, are hereby set aside. Petitioner Mahaveer S/o Shri Rampal Teli is acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 on the offence having been compounded by the complainant-Respondent No. 2 Gyan Chand. The sentence awarded by the order dated 16.08.2005 was suspended by this Court vide order dated 21.09.2005 till 110.2005. Thereafter the petitioner has not surrendered. The petitioner need not to surrender in compliance of the order dated 21.09.2005 as he has been acquitted now. The application for suspension of sentence stands disposed of .