Allowed

Chandra Shekhar Batra v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Nov 2023CRLR/84/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court set aside conviction and imprisonment for cheque dishonour after parties entered compromise. Petitioner ordered to deposit 15% of cheque amount as cost to Legal Services Authority within one month; failure leads to listing for further orders.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and imprisonment set aside subject to deposit of 15% of cheque amount as cost within one month.

Chandra Shekhar Batra Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:39918]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 84/2021

¶4

Chandra Shekhar Batra S/o Shri Ramesh Chandra Batra, Aged About 44 Years, C/69-70, R.k. Puram, Jaipur Road, Bikaner. (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Bikaner).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

Shri Shiv Ratan Soni S/o Shri Ram Lal Soni, D-30, Shastri Nagar, Bikaner.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.S. Kotwani Ms. Swati Shekhar For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, PP Mr. Bharat Singh, for respondent No.2

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG Order

¶12

21/11/2023

¶13

This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 23.01.2020 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.3, Bikaner, whereby the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed and the judgment dated 12.12.2018 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate (NI Act Cases) No.1, Bikaner for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed and the petitioner sentenced to undergo one year’s simple imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.2,85,000/- in default of payment, he shall further undergo four months’ simple imprisonment.

¶14

Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the revision petition, the petitioner and complainant-respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.2 has received all the amount from the

[2023:RJ-JD:39918]

[CRLR-84/2021]

(2 of 3)

petitioner and does not want to proceed in the matter. It is stated that since the parties have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute, therefore, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner may be set aside.

¶19

Counsel for the respondent No.2 concurs the fact of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶20

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled the dispute and complainant respondent No.2 has accepted the sum towards full and final settlement of dispute on the satisfaction of the complainant and in the light of provisions of Section 147 of NI Act and in view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663 , the sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act is liable to be set aside. However, since the compromise has been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, a cost of 15% of the cheque amount deserves to be imposed upon the petitioner in the light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (Supra).

¶21

Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment dated 12.12.2018 and 23.01.2020 are hereby set aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to deposition of cost of 15% of the cheque amount. The cost shall be deposited by the petitioner with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within a period of one month from today. In case the cost is not deposited by the petitioner within

[2023:RJ-JD:39918]

[CRLR-84/2021]

(3 of 3)

the stipulated period, the revision petition may be listed before

¶26

this Court for passing appropriate orders.

¶27

The revision petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶28

A copy of this order be sent to the office of Legal Services

¶29

Authority at Jodhpur.

¶30

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶31

107-Ishan/-

Chandra Shekhar Batra v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Shekhar Batra 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Mohan @ Mintu Vs State of Rajasthan

Anuj Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kaana Ram @ Kanaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Chandra Shekhar Batra Vs State of Rajasthan

Chandra Shekhar Batra Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharmal Vs State of Rajasthan