Partly allowed

Bhanwar Lal v. Ramchandra

Rajasthan HC21 May 2024CRLR/633/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court condoned delay in filing criminal revision and set aside conviction and imprisonment for cheque bounce offence. Court imposed 15% cost of cheque amount to be deposited with Legal Services Authority to avail settlement benefit under S. 147 NI Act.

What did the court decide?

Set aside conviction and sentence subject to deposit of 15% cost of cheque amount within one month before Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur.

Bhanwar Lal Vs Ramchandra — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:22923]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 633/2024

¶4

Bhanwar Lal S/o Kukaram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Kesarpura (Yeklingpura), Post Kaldwas Dist. Udaipur

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ramchandra S/o Bherulal Prajapat, R/o 50 Purohito Ki Madari, Pani Ki Tanki Ke Pas, Dist. Udaipur

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. K.P. Raj Deora
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
	Mr. Harshit Yadav for the complainant

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶12

Order

¶13

21/05/2024

¶14

An application has been filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the criminal revision petition.

¶15

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the criminal revision petition is hereby condoned.

¶16

This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 24.02.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur, in Criminal Appeal No.95/2022 (CIS No.95/2022) by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment dated 29.10.2021 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.6, Udaipur, in Criminal Original Case No.671/2018 (CIS No. 16313/2015) convicting and sentencing the petitioner for offence

[CRLR-633/2024]

[2024:RJ-JD:22923]

(2 of 3)

under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.8,09,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo two months' simple imprisonment.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant-respondent No.1 have entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.1 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.

¶22

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 concurs with the facts stated by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

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

¶24

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant respondent No.1 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

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:22923]

[CRLR-633/2024]

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).

¶29

Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgments dated 24.02.2023 and 29.10.2021 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.

¶30

The revision petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶31

The stay application is also decided.

¶32

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

¶33

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶34

166- Arjun /-

Bhanwar Lal v. Ramchandra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhanwar Lal v. Ramchandra

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

Vikram Vs State of Rajasthan

Dixit Kumar Vs Piyush Jain

Amarjeet Singh @ Kaka Vs State of Rajasthan

Jogaram Vs State

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Goru Lal Vs State