Allowed

Mani Jagdish Pilley v. Ishwarchand Lalchand Jain and Anr.

Bombay HC24 Nov 2014REVN/49/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal revision, setting aside the impugned acquittal judgment after accepting consent terms filed by the parties. The Court directed that the compounded offence be treated as settled.

What did the court decide?

Judgment of trial and appellate courts is set aside; applicant acquitted of offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

Mani Jagdish Pilley Vs Ishwarchand Lalchand Jain and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

Waghmare 50.revn.49.11.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 49 OF 2011

¶4

Mr. Mani Jagdish Pilley

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Ishwarchand Lalchand Jain & Anr. .. Respondents

¶8

Shri Sachin R. Pawar for the Applicant. Shri R.R. Sharma for the Respondent. Smt. P.P. Bhosasle, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.

¶9

CORAM :- M.L. TAHALIYANI, J.

¶10

DATED :- 24^th NOVEMBER, 2014.

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

This Revision Application is filed by the applicant against judgment and order passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court (Sessions Court). During the pendency of the present Revision Application, the applicant (original accused) and the respondent No.1 (complainant) have resolved the dispute amicably and, therefore, consent terms have been filed by them. The consent terms be taken on record and be marked as Exh. 'A'. The applicant had deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in the trial Court but later on he had deposited another amount of Rs.1,25,000/- in the trial Court. As such, the applicant has deposited Rs.2,25,000/- as of today. The cheque amount was Rs.2,25,000/-. The respondent No.1, who is present before the Court wants to compound the offence. After

¶13

¶14

Waghmare 50.revn.49.11.doc

¶15

having gone through the consent terms and after having heard the applicant and respondent No.1 and their counsel, I have come to the conclusion that the offence has been compounded without any extraneous reasons.

¶16

In view of the fact that offence has been compounded, the judgment passed by the trial Court and the Appellate Court are set aside. The applicant is acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The amount of Rs.2,25,000/- deposited by the applicant in the trial Court shall be disbursed to the respondent No.1 by the trial Court within a period of two weeks from today. One steno copy each shall be provided to the petitioner and the respondent No.1. The trial Court is directed to act upon steno copy.

¶17

(JUDGE)

¶18

Mani Jagdish Pilley v. Ishwarchand Lalchand Jain and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mani Jagdish Pilley v. Ishwarchand Lalchand Jain 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

Sau. Namrata W/O Satish Meshram (Maiden Name Namrata D/O Gulabrao Gajbhiye) Vs Shri. Satish S/O Vishwanath Meshram

State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. Frezarpura P.S. Amravati Vs Ashok S/O Langhaji Wankhede

Tahira Hafizulla Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ganesh Herbas Vs Sujit R. Halarankar and Anr.

M/S. Plus Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs G. v. Ravu Kumar and Anr.

Vilas Waman Gholap Vs Ganpat Rangnath Patil and Anr.