Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 655 (HP)

Rakesh Narnol v. Rajesh Kumar

2025-04-07

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
Judgment : (Virender Singh, J.) Petitioner-Rakesh Narnol has filed the present revision petition against the judgment dated 17.01.2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No.101-N/10 of 2016, titled as Rakesh Narnol versus Rajesh Kumar & Another. 2. By way of judgment dated 17.01.2022, the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed, by the petitioner, against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2016, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Criminal Complaint No.79/3 of 2014, titled as Rajesh Kumar versus Rakesh Narnol. 3. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2016, learned trial Court has convicted the petitioner, for the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NI Act’) and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of one month and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- to the complainant. 4. After dismissal of the appeal by the learned Appellate Court, the present revision petition has been preferred. 5. During the pendency of the present petition, the parties have settled the matter. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed application bearing Cr.MP No.1299 of 2025, for permitting the parties to compound the offence, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties. 6. Statement of both the parties have been recorded, in which, they both have deposed that the dispute with regard to Cheque No.894794, dated 15.07.2014, has been settled between the parties. 7. Today, the accused is present before this Court. He has deposed that he has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2016. 8. Against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, he had filed the appeal before the learned Appellate Court and the learned Appellate Court has also dismissed his appeal. Now, he is before this Court, in the present revision petition. 9. In addition to this, the accused has also submitted that during the pendency of the revision petition, the matter has been compromised between him and the complainant. Now, he is before this Court, in the present revision petition. 9. In addition to this, the accused has also submitted that during the pendency of the revision petition, the matter has been compromised between him and the complainant. He has also deposed that he has deposited a sum of Rs.1,27,500/-, in the Registry of this Court and a sum of Rs.35,735/-, in the learned trial Court. He has also deposed that today, he has deposited the remaining amount of Rs.6775/-, in the Registry of this Court. 10. The petitioner has also deposed that on the basis of the said compromise, the present petition may kindly be allowed by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, and he may kindly be acquitted of the charge. 11. Respondent No.1 has also made the similar statement and has prayed that the amount deposited by the petitioner before the learned trial Court, as well as, before the Registry of this Court, may kindly be released, in his favour. He has also deposed that he has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the accused is acquitted by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2016. 13. On the basis of the statements, so made by the parties, one thing is clear that the matter has been settled between the parties and in pursuance of the said settlement, the petitioner has deposited the entire amount of compensation. 14. According to the respondent-complainant, the dispute with regard to Cheque No.894794, has been settled. 15. Since, the matter, with regard to cheque, in question, has been settled between the parties, as such, the application, bearing Cr.MP No.1299 of 2025, is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence. 16. Considering the fact that the application for compounding of the offence has been allowed, the present petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2016, passed by learned trial Court in Criminal Complaint No.79/3 of 2014, which has been affirmed by learned Appellate Court, in Criminal Appeal No.101-N/10 of 2016, vide judgment dated 17.01.2022, are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 NI Act. His personal and surety bonds are discharged. 17. His personal and surety bonds are discharged. 17. However, this order shall be, subject to deposit of 7% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee, within ten weeks from today. 50% of the compounding fee be deposited with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% with the H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla. 18. It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within ten weeks, then, the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2016, passed by learned trial Court and in that eventuality, he shall surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court. 19. The amount deposited by the accused before the learned trial Court, as well as, the Registry of this Court, is ordered to be released in favour of complainant. 20. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.