Conditional allowance of a criminal revision against a sentencing order under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court set aside the conviction and imprisonment upon a compromise and full payment, subject to an additional deposit of 15% of the cheque amount.
Conviction and imprisonment set aside subject to deposit of 15% cost of cheque amount within one month.
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-JD:14372]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 398/2024
Arjun Kumar S/o Shri Manoj Kumar, Aged About 35 Years, C/o Kishan Khatnawaliya House No. 14, Gali No. 09, Indra Colony, Corner House, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Diwan Chand, R/o 51 , Rajya Karmchari Colony, Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saurabh Soni For Respondent(s) : Mr. RS Rawal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
01/04/2024
The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the present criminal revision petition is allowed for reasons stated therein. The delay in filing the criminal revision petition is hereby condoned.
The matter is being heard and decided today itself.
This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 04.01.2022 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No.1, Sriganganagar in Criminal Appeal No.89/2018, by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment dated 15.11.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (NI Act Cases) No.2, Sriganganagar in Crl. Case No.575/2014 (CIS No. 12539/2014) 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 imprisonment along with
(2 of 3) [CRLR-398/2024]
[2024:RJ-JD:14372]
fine in the sum of Rs.1,30,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo 15 Days’ simple imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant-respondent have entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent 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.
Learned counsel for respondent concurs with the facts stated by the counsel for the petitioner.
I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties and perused the compromise deed.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant respondent 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 light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra).
[2024:RJ-JD:14372]
[CRLR-398/2024]
(3 of 3)
Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment dated 04.01.2022 and 15.11.2018 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 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.
The revision petition is allowed in the above terms. Suspension of sentence application also stands decided accordingly.
A copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
73-GKaviya/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether conviction and sentence for Section 138 NI Act offence should be set aside upon compromise and full payment.
Whether a cost of 15% of the cheque amount should be imposed upon the petitioner as a condition for setting aside the sentence post-appeal rejection.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.Relied on¶22
Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Arjun Kumar
Ashok Kumar
Manoj Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
