Conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 NI Act were challenged in revision. The parties settled, cheque amount was paid to the complainant, compromise was verified by Registrar (Judicial), and the Court quashed the trial and appellate court orders and acquitted the petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JP:8835]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 182/2024
----Accused-Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, Advocate for Mr. Hridayesh Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar, Public Prosecutor Ms. Sapna Singh, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order
20/02/2024 :
By way of filing the present petition under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have challenged the judgment dt.11.09.2018 passed by Court of Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases), No.17, Jaipur Metropolitan, in Criminal Case No.138/2017, whereby ld. Magistrate has convicted the petitioners for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act & sentenced them to undergo one year simple imprisonment & has also ordered to pay a sum of Rs.2,85,760/- to the complainant-respondent, as compensation, and in default thereof, to further undergo three months additional simple imprisonment. The petitioners have also challenged the judgment dt. 04.11.2023 passed
[2024:RJ-JP:8835]
[CRLR-182/2024]
(2 of 3)
by Court of Additional Sessions Judge, No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, in Criminal Appeal No.61/2018, whereby ld. Judge, while dismissing the appeal, has confirmed the judgment of conviction & sentence passed by ld. Magistrate.
Facts of the present case, in brief, are that the petitioners have given two cheques to complainant for different dates amounting to Rs.90,000/- & Rs.95,780/-, which on presentation were returned back with the remarks of’ Payment Stopped By Drawer’. A legal notice was also served upon the petitioners. A complaint was filed & trial Court took cognizance for offence u/s.138 of N.I. Act. The trial Court had convicted the petitioners for the alleged offence & sentenced them to undergo maximum period of one year simple imprisonment alongwith fine. Aggrieved by aforesaid order, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the appellate Court, which was also dismissed, while upholding the conviction & sentence awarded by ld. Magistrate. Hence, this revision.
In the present case, learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners, contends that now the parties have entered into a compromise dt.14.02.2024 and the dispute between them has been amicably settled. Therefore, the present petition may be allowed, the impugned orders be quashed & set aside and the petitioners be acquitted from the charges levelled against them.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the material made available on record.
The dispute is inter-se in between the parties and does not affect the society at large. The complainant has now entered into a compromise with the present petitioners.
In compliance of the order passed by this Court today, the parties have appeared before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court for
[2024:RJ-JP:8835]
[CRLR-182/2024]
(3 of 3)
verification of compromise & deposited a cost of Rs.20,000/- in the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur. He has verified & attested the compromise arrived at between the parties and submitted his report, which is taken on record.
As per compromise dt.14.02.2024, complainant/ respondent has entered into a settlement/agreement with the petitioners and received complete cheque amount and has no objection if the impugned orders are quashed & set aside, and the parties do not want to proceed further in the matter.
The aim & purpose of Section 138 of N.I. Act is not to punish the accused but to ensure that the due amount is duly returned to the complainant. Considering the nature of litigation under Section 138 of N.I. Act, in case the amount is paid and is duly accepted by the complainant, the matter should be compounded and the accused should be acquitted.
In the present case, the cheque amount has duly been accepted by the complainant and the compromise dt.14.02.2024 is a clear proof thereof.
Thus, in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, this Court deems it just and proper to acquit the petitioners from the charges and allow the revision petition filed by the petitioners.
Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed . The impugned orders are quashed & set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the charges levelled against him.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J.
ASHOK/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act should be quashed on the basis of a post-appeal compromise between complainant and accused.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Subhash Rajawat
S.R. Consultancy & Contractors
Madan Lal Sharma
State of Rajasthan
Vinod Kumar Bharwani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
