Allowed

Vijay Rathi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Apr 2024CRLR/144/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 NI Act, accepting a compromise between parties. The court imposed a condition requiring the petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount as cost before the State Legal Services Authority.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence set aside subject to deposit of 15% cost of cheque amount with Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority within one month.

Vijay Rathi Vs State of Rajasthan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:14899]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 144/2024

¶4

Vijay Rathi S/o Nandkishore Rathi, Aged About 38 Years, R/o M/s Aarti Enterprises, Ram Rishi Ashram (Gaddi) Road, Inside Siwanchi Gate, Jodhpur. 2Nd Address- Flat No. 205, 2Nd Floor, Marudeep Apartment, Hemu Colony Circle, 1St B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

1.	State Of Raj	Versus asthan, Through Pp
2.	M/s Shree	Vinayak Enterprises, 260, 4Th B Road,
	Sardarpura,	Jodhpur Through His Partner Anil
	Maheshwari.

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Neel kamal Bohra
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Aneesh Bhurat, PP assisted by
		Mr. C.P. Marwan
		Mr. Pankaj Arora for the complainant

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶10

Order

¶11

04/04/2024

¶12

This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 04.06.2022 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan, in Criminal Appeal No.04/2020 (N.C.V. No.17/2020) by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment dated 11.12.2019 passed by the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate, (N.I. Act Cases) No.3, Jodhpur Metropolitan, in Criminal Original Case No.451/2019

¶13

(N.C.V. No.3636/2018) convicting and sentencing the petitioner for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo one year simple

¶14

(2 of 3) [CRLR-144/2024]

¶15

[2024:RJ-JD:14899]

¶16

imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.8,47000/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo four month’s simple imprisonment.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 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 petitioner and does not want to proceed with the matter, therefore the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner may be set aside. The copy of the compromise is already placed on record.

¶18

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 concurs with the facts stated by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶19

I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties and perused the compromise deed.

¶20

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled their 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

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:14899]

[CRLR-144/2024]

imposed upon the petitioner in light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra).

¶25

Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment dated 04.06.2022 and 11.12.2019 is 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 before 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 before the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within the stipulated period, the revision petition may be listed before this Court for passing appropriate orders.

¶26

The revision petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶27

A copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur.

¶28

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶29

8- Arjun /-

Vijay Rathi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Rathi 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

Zarina Vs State of Rajasthan

Tagi Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajudas Vs State of Rajasthan

Megh Raj Vs State

Kailash Singh Vs State

Chand Singh Vs State of Rajasthan