Quashed

Swarup Chatterjee@Swarup Kumar Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC20 Sept 2022CRR/3/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Calcutta disposed of a criminal revision under Section 138 NI Act relying on a post-trial settlement. The revision was quashed and the conviction/sentence set aside upon payment and acceptance of the amount by the opposite party.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed in favour of the petitioner; sentence order set aside on account of settlement and payment of dues.

Swarup Chatterjee@Swarup Kumar Chatterjee Vs State of West… — Cheque Dishonour | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

Form J(1) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction

¶2

Appellate Side

¶3

Present :

¶4

The Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri

¶5

IA No.:CRAN/2/2022, CRAN/3/2022

¶6

¶7

CRR 3 of 2022

¶8

Sri Swarup Chatterjee @ Swarup Kumar Chatterjee Vs.

¶9

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

¶10

For the petitioner : Mr. Sujoy Sarkar, Adv.

¶11

For the State : Ms. Manisha Sharma, Adv.

¶12

Judgement on :

¶13

20.09.2022.

¶14

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

¶15

The accused/petitioner was convicted for committing an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act vide order dated 30^th December, 2014 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3^rd Court, Suri, Birbhum in CR Case No. 465/2009. The said order was challenged in appeal before the Learned Sessions Judge. The appeal was heard by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2^nd Court, Suri, Birbhum who upon hearing was pleased to confirm the judgment and order of conviction in Criminal Appeal No. 4/2015. The instant revision is assailing the orders of both the Courts below.

¶16

¶17

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that during the pendency of the instant revision the dispute between the parties has amicably been settled. The petitioner has already paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- being the substantial part of the cheque amount and today he is going to pay a draft of balance amount of Rs.25,000/-. The opposite party has accepted the said amount. It is stated by the Learned Advocate for the opposite party that in view of such settlement and receipt of the money for which the petitioner was indebted, he is willing to compound the offence. In view of such circumstances and considering the statutory provision that an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is compoundable in nature, the joint application for settlement is accepted. The instant revision is disposed of on the basis of such settlement.

¶18

In view of such settlement the order of sentence passed against the petitioner by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3^rd Court at Suri in CR Case No. 465/2009 and affirmed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2^nd Court, Suri in Criminal Appeal No. 4/2015 is set aside.

¶19

The parties are at liberty to act on the server copy of this order.

¶20

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)

¶21

Srimanta, A.R.(Ct.) Item No.01 .

Swarup Chatterjee@Swarup Kumar Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swarup Chatterjee@Swarup Kumar Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal 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

Surajit Joardar and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Palak Agarwal and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Devesh Sonthalia and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Sanjay Paswan @Lala Vs State of West Bengal

Suman Bera@Soumyadip Bera Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Larmar J Singh and Another Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.