Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2620 (RAJ)

Ramesh Chandra Mantri v. State

2019-09-27

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2019
JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 06.03.2019 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.3, Bhilwara, whereby the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed and the judgment dated 10.03.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.2, Bhilwara for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed and the petitioner sentenced to undergo one year's simple imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.40,000/-. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the revision petition, the petitioner and complainant-respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.2 has received all the amount from the petitioner and does not want to proceed in the matter. The photo- stat copy of the compromise dated 26.09.2019 has been passed over to this Court during the course of argument, which shall be formed part of the record. It is stated that since the parties have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute, therefore, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner may be set aside. 3. Counsel for the respondent No.2 concurs the fact of compromise dated 26.09.2019 arrived between the parties. 4. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled the dispute and complainant respondent No.2 has accepted the sum towards full and final settlement of dispute on the satisfaction of the complainant and in the light of provisions of Section 147 of N.I. Act and in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663 : ( AIR 2010 SC 1907 ), the sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act is liable to be set aside. However, since the compromise has been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, a cost of 15% of the cheque amount deserves to be imposed upon the petitioner in the light of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra). 5. However, since the compromise has been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, a cost of 15% of the cheque amount deserves to be imposed upon the petitioner in the light of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra). 5. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment dated 10.03.2017 and 06.03.2019 are hereby set aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to deposition of cost of 15% of the cheque amount. The cost shall be deposited by the petitioner with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within a period of four weeks from today. In case the cost is not deposited by the petitioner within the stipulated period, the revision petition may be listed before this Court for passing appropriate orders. 6. The revision petition is disposed of. 7. Application for suspension of sentence as well as application for taking compromise on record are also disposed of accordingly.