Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1395 (JHR)

Sanjeev Jha v. State of Jharkhand

2015-11-03

AMITAV K.GUPTA

body2015
ORDER : I.A. No. 6035 of 2015 This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 213 days in preferring this revision application. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant/O.P. No. 02 has not raised any serious objection. 3. Considering the reasons assigned in para-4 of the supporting affidavit and the medical certificates annexed thereto, sufficient cause and reasonable explanation is made out for condoning the delay, accordingly, the delay is hereby, condoned. 4. Accordingly, I.A. No. 6035 of 2015 stands allowed. Cr. Revision No. 1300 of 2015 This Criminal Revision Application has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 20.12.2014, passed in Cr. Appeal No. 91 of 2014 whereby, the learned Judicial Commissioner-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XVIII, Ranchi, has affirmed the order dated 11.04.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 800 of 2010, convicting the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, and sentencing him to undergo S.I for one year and to pay Rs.9,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant/O.P. No. 02. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the petitioner had issued a cheque of Rs.11,00,000/- (Rupees eleven lakhs), dated 05.01.2010 in favour of O.P. No. 02, Vijay Prasad, towards payment of the loan amount taken by the petitioner from the complainant. When the said cheque was presented for encashment by O.P. No. 02 to the bank, it was dishonoured due to 'Insufficient Fund' in the account of the drawer. Thereafter the complainant sent a legal notice to the petitioner on 17.04.2010 for payment of the loan amount. Despite the service of notice, the petitioner did not make the payment, whereupon, a complaint Case was filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. After enquiry, cognizance was taken under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the case was transferred to the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi on the basis of the evidence and materials available on record, convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, which was affirmed in appeal by the learned Judicial Commissioner-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XVIII, Ranchi by the aforesaid impugned order. 3. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi on the basis of the evidence and materials available on record, convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, which was affirmed in appeal by the learned Judicial Commissioner-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XVIII, Ranchi by the aforesaid impugned order. 3. Learned counsel, for the petitioner, has submitted that the parties have settled their dispute out of court and the joint compromise petition has been filed bearing I.A. No. 6283 of 2015. It is submitted that as per the agreement dated 29.09.2015, annexed with the joint compromise petition, the petitioner is ready to pay the entire cheque amount, i.e., Rs.11,00,000/- in satisfaction of the liabilities to the complaint/O.P. No. 02. The complainant/O.P. No. 02 has now no grievance against the petitioner. It is submitted that since the parties have compromised the case, the order dated 20.12.2014, passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XVIII, Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 91 of 2014 and order dated 11.04.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 800 of 2010 be quashed. It has also been submitted that the compromise be accepted and the offence be allowed to be compounded considering, the fact that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is compoundable in nature. 4. Learned counsel, for the complainant/O.P. No. 02, has admitted that petitioner has paid Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) in cash and has issued a cheque of Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees nine lakhs) in favour of O.P. No. 02/complainant, as per the terms of the compromise agreed upon by the parties. That the complainant has no grievance against the petitioner and he does not want to proceed with the case. 5. Since, the complainant/O.P. No. 02 and the petitioner have amicably settled the matter as per the terms and conditions of compromise entered into by both the parties and considering the fact that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable in nature, as such, the compromise is accepted and the offence is allowed to be compounded. Thus in view of the compromise and for securing the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of the process of court, the impugned order and judgment dated 20.12.2014, passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XVIII, Ranchi in Cr. Thus in view of the compromise and for securing the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of the process of court, the impugned order and judgment dated 20.12.2014, passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner-cum-Additional Sessions Judge-XVIII, Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 91 of 2014 and order dated 11.04.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 800 of 2010 are hereby, set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the offence and is directed to be released from jail custody forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. 6. In the result the Cr. Revision application, and Interlocutory Application No. 6283 of 2015 are, hereby, allowed.