Allowed

Mohd Khadeer Mohd Khutuboddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Sept 2013REVN/3/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench allowed a revision application against conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 NI Act. The court observed that the parties had settled the dispute during pendency. Accordingly, the court granted leave to compound the offence, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Leave to compound offence granted. Conviction and sentence set aside. Applicant acquitted. Bail bonds discharged. Deposit paid to complainant. Costs Rs.3,000 awarded.

Mohd Khadeer Mohd Khutuboddin Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.3 OF 2013

¶3

MOHD KHADEER MOHD KHUTUBODDIN VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

¶4

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. G.R. Syed APP for Respondents : Mr.P.N.Muley Mr. Vinod I Thole advocate for R/2

¶5

CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. Dated: September 03, 2013

¶6

P.C. :-

¶7

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. Heard the learned APP for respondent no.1 and heard the learned counsel for respondent no.2 i.e. original complainant. The applicant was convicted of an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The appeal filed by him was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad. Being aggrieved by his conviction and the sentence imposed upon him, the applicant has approached this Court by filing the present Revision Application.

¶8

Learned counsel for the parties informed me that during the pendancy of the present revision proceedings, the parties have settled the dispute between themselves. A joint pursis signed by the parties and their counsel is filed in the Court and same is taken on record.

¶9

I am satisfied that the parties have indeed resolved the dispute between themselves, amicably. It would be proper, therefore, in my opinion, to permit them to compound the offence in question.

¶10

aaa/-

¶11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶12

2 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.3 OF 2013

¶13

Leave to compound the offence, is granted. In view of this, the order of conviction of the applicant as recorded by the Magistrate and the sentence imposed upon him, is set aside.

¶14

The offence is compounded.

¶15

The applicant stands acquitted.

¶16

Bail bonds executed by him are discharged.

¶17

The amount deposited by the applicant in the Court of learned Magistrate be paid to the respondent no.2 - original complainant, as per the terms of the compromise.

¶18

Fine, if paid by the applicant, be refunded to him. The applicant, shall however, pay the costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rs. Three thousand only) within a period of TWO WEEKS from today.

¶19

10. Revision application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶20

( ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. )

¶21

aaa/-

Mohd Khadeer Mohd Khutuboddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Khadeer Mohd Khutuboddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bandappa Hanmantrao Gandigude Vs Shivraj Nagappa Ghogade

Shivraj Nagappa Ghogade Vs Bandappa Hanmantrao Gandigude

Latif Khan Natthe Khan Tadvi Vs Satpuda Urban Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Faizpur and Another

Mohd Khadeer Mohd Khutuboddin Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nitin @ Krishnakant Sambhaji Bhujbal Vs Jaya Nitin @ Krishnakant Bhujbal and Another

Vitthal Subhanrao Tidke and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another