Allowed

Binod Kumar Jha v. State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC27 Sept 2021Cr.Rev./1113/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered a criminal revision under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alongside an interlocutory application for joint compromise. Finding that the parties had settled the dispute outside court, the Court set aside the conviction and sentence.

What did the court decide?

The judgment of conviction and sentence were set aside; the petitioner was acquitted and relieved of bail liabilities.

Binod Kumar Jha Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Rev. No. 1113 of 2008

¶3

With

¶4

I.A. No.2706 of 2009

¶5

Binod Kumar Jha, S/o Yaduvir Jha Resident of Flat NO.101, Aradhana Apartment Opposite Loreto School Doranda, North Office Para, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi … …

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

Jaideo Chatterjee, S/o Samir Kumar Chatterjee Resident of Round House North Office Para, P.S. – Doranda, Dist - Ranchi

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶10

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Adv. For the Opp. Parties : Ms. Nehala Sharmin, Adv.

¶12

¶13

Through Video Conferencing

¶14

¶15

16 /27.09.2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate is present.

¶16

2. Nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

¶17

3. This criminal revision application has been filed against the order and judgment dated 17.09.2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.117/07 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner XVIIIth, Ranchi whereby the learned appellate authority held the petitioner/appellant guilty of the charges u/s 138 of N.I. Act and affirmed the conviction order dated 21.05.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No.187/03/T.R. No.895 /07. The learned trial court sentenced the petitioner to undergo S.I of 3 months u/s 138 N.I. Act and directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as a compensation to complainant as per provision laid down u/s 357 Cr.P.C.

¶18

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Interlocutory application being I.A. No.2706 of 2009 has been filed in the present case which is in the nature of joint compromise petition as the parties have settled the case outside the court and they are immediate neighbours. He submits that a prayer has been made in the joint

¶19

¶20

compromise petition to accept the same and the petitioner/accused be acquitted and the sentence of fine be also set aside.

¶21

5. The learned counsel for the State Ms. Nehala Sharmin, appears in the present case. She submits that if a joint compromise petition has been filed and is on record, then the case may be disposed of and as the matter is between the petitioner and the opposite party no.2 and the conviction is under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. She further submits that she does not have any objection if the conviction as well as the sentence of the petitioner is set aside pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶22

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that I.A. No.2706 of 2009 is on record which is filed by way of a joint compromise petition and an affidavit of the complainant as well as the petitioner is on record. As the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court, the present criminal revision petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise and accordingly the judgment of conviction and sentence of the petitioner passed in Complaint Case No.187/03/T.R. No.895 /07 dated 21.05.2007 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi as well as the order and judgment dated 17.09.2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.117/07 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner XVIIIth, Ranchi are hereby set aside.

¶23

7. Accordingly, I.A. No.2706 of 2009 as well as the present criminal revision petition is hereby disposed of in terms of compromise.

¶24

8. The petitioner is discharged from his liabilities under the bail bond furnished by him.

¶25

9. The office is directed to send back the lower court records to the court concerned.

¶26

10. Let this order be communicated to the learned court below through ‘FAX/ e-mail’.

¶27

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶28

Saurav

Binod Kumar Jha v. State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binod Kumar Jha v. State of Jharkhand 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

Banaras Sah Banaras Saha Vs State of Jharkhand

Randho Lohra Alias Budu Nag Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Singh Alias Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shrawan Kumar Ghiria Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Hasib Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ganesh Napit Vs State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Banaras Sah  Banaras Saha Vs State of Jharkhand

Randho Lohra Alias Budu Nag Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Singh Alias Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shrawan Kumar Ghiria Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Hasib Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ganesh Napit Vs State of Jharkhand

Banaras Sah Banaras Saha Vs State of Jharkhand