Allowed

Nathulal S/O Sitaram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Jan 2023CRLR/1694/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, this single-judge High Court bench allowed a petition for quashing a conviction under Section 420 IPC and modifying a lower appellate decision in a cheating case based on an amicable settlement between the complainant and the accused.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the judgment of conviction and the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge; acquitted the accused; discharged the bail bonds.

Nathulal S/O Sitaram Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 169412022

¶2

Nathulal S/o Sitaram Sharma, Resident Of Kalvaniyo Ki Dhani, Tan Tunga, Police Station Tunga District Jaipur Rajasthan (At Present Confined In District Jail Jaipur)

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶6

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bal Ram Vashisth For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahesh Chand Meena Mr. S.S. Mahla, P.P.

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶8

Order

¶9

05/01/2023

¶10

The accused petitioner was tried for accusation of committing offences under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 12, Bassi, Jaipur Metropolitan-I and vide order dated 08.11.2021, he was acquitted from the offence committed under Section 406 IPC and convicted for offence committed under Section 420 IPC and sentenced to suffer three years simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo three months imprisonment.

¶11

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bassi, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in Criminal Appeal No. 2512021. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the

¶12

**.t<>{ -.t"$&.-* ,r q?$&? -%+ ,. $& +.W$$ (2 of 4) [CRR-1694/2022] "p appeal vide judgment dated 1"9.,09.2022 and upheld the order dated 08.11.2021.

¶13

By way of filing the instant revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of CrPC, challenge has been made by the accused to the judgment dated 19.09.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bassi, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in Criminal Appeal No. 25/2021 whereby the learned appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and upheld the order dated 08.11.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 12, Bassi, Jaipur Metropolitan-I.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accusedpetitioner has nothing to do with the offence alleged and the complainant has levelled false allegations against him. Now, the complainant and the accused have buried the hatchet and have reached at an amicable settlement. A compromise has been executed between the parties as per which the complainant of the case has no objection if the instant revision petition is disposed off in light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, therefore, it is prayed that the revision may be allowed and the orders passed by the courts below be quashed and set aside.

¶15

Learned counsel for the complainant does not object to the factum of compromise and the complainant has no issues if the present petition is disposed off as a compromise has been executed between the parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for the public prosecutor opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶17

[~~~?~-169Li/2022]

¶18

Heard learned couns arties and perused the material available on record. During the course of hearing of the revision petition, the parties have amicably settled the dispute and have entered into a compromise. The parties are present in person before this Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsels and the compromise has been verified. The second application for suspension of sentence of the accused-petitioner was also allowed by a co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 22.11.2022 on the basis of the compromise effected between the parties.

¶19

As per Section 320 of CrPC, the offence under section 420 IPC is compoundable with the permission of the court at the instance of the person who has been cheated. The compromise available on record clearly reflects the intention of the complainant to not pursue and continue any proceeding against the accusedpetitioner and he has expressed his wish that the instant revision petition be disposed of in light of the compromise affected between the parties and the accused-petitioner be acquitted.

¶20

Since the matter does not pertain to breach of peace and tranquility and does not affect the society at large, therefore, there is no impediment to quash the conviction on the ground of compromise effected in between the parties.

¶21

Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and the judgment of conviction dated 08.11.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 12, Bassi, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in criminal regular case No. 1532/2016 as well as judgment dated 19.09.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bassi,

¶22

r;kl".> ""+$, -?- ',,P* ,>:. *<+, .j" $$*V"P' ytk (4 gf 4) [CRLR-1694/2022] "ti"f$i p' **a$;+ Jaipur Metropolitan-I in CrirninaT,"Appeal No. 2512021 are hereby quashed and set aside. The accused is acquitted from the charges levelled against him. He is on bail, he need not surrender back. His bail bonds are discharged.

¶23

All pending applications stand disposed off.

Nathulal S/O Sitaram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nathulal S/O Sitaram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashutosh Vashisth S/O Shri Tej Kumar Vashisth, Vs Abhinandan Vashisth S/O Shri Tej Kumar Vashisth

Harsahai Verma S/O Shri Pooran Mal Verma Vs State of Rajasthan

Bal Mukund Sharma S/O Shri Bajrang Lal Sharma Vs Sanjay Bansal S/O Pooran Chand Mahajan

Nijamudeen Son of Shri Kamrudeenshah Vs Intejamiya Wakf Committee

Nijamudeen Son of Shri Kamrudeen Vs Chief Executive Officer

Badri Narayan S/O Shri Jagdish Narayan Vs Vimal Kumar Sogani S/O Shri Veer Chand Jain