Manoj Kumar Sao Vs Raghunandan Sao

The applicant has filed this revision being aggrieved by order dated 17.04.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Durg (CG), whereby learned Session Judge has affirmed the order dated 31.10.2023 passed by learned Magistrate sentencing the applicant/revisionist for 10 months RI alongwith fine of Rs. 2,24,000 for the offence under Section 138 of NI Act, 1881 and 03 months additional RI in default of fine.

¶15

As per case of the prosecution, the applicant/revisionist borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from the respondent/complainant for his

¶16

2

¶17

personal needs, since both the parties were known to each other, with a promise to repay the same. Subsequently, after several demands, revisionist has given a cheque to the respondent bearing No.720458 of Corporation Bank, which got dishonored on the ground of insufficient funds. The aforesaid factual scenario led to filing of a complaint case against the present revisionist under the NI Act.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that in pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 03.11.2025, the parties appeared before the Additional Registrar (J) of this Court and their statements have been recorded affirming that an agreement on 03.05.2025 named & styled as “ Samjhouta-nama ” have been executed between them. Pursuant to said agreement, applicant/revisionist has already paid sum of Rs.1,96,000/- to the respondent as also paid Rs.76,000/- during trial and Rs.28,000/- before the Appellate Court to the respondent as recorded in impugned order. Hence, it is prayed that the instant revision may be allowed; conviction and sentence against the applicant under Section 138 of the NI Act be set-aside on the basis above compromise.

¶19

In this regard, I.A. No. 01/2025, an application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 has been filed by the applicant.

¶20

Perusal of compromise/ Samjhouta-nama (Annexure A-3) shows that the applicant and respondent-complainant have amicably settlement their dispute and the applicant/revisionist has already

¶21

3

¶22

paid sum of Rs.1,96,000/- to the respondent. He also paid Rs.76,000/- during trial and Rs.28,000/- before the Appellate Court to the respondent as recorded in the impugned order and, thereby he has paid the whole amount to the respondent.

¶23