High CourtsSingle Bench

Bikramjit Singh vs Darshan Singh and another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 3 April 2018 · Citation: (2018) 04 P&H CK 0030

HON’BLE JUDGES
Augustine George Masih, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No.4104 of 2017 (O&M)

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 351 words

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)

On the last date of hearing, when the case came up for hearing, following order was passed:-

“Custody certificate is taken on record.

A demand draft No.408846 dated 18.01.2018 amounting to `3,75,000/- has been handed over to Darshan Singh son of Tara Singh-respondent No.1,

who is the complainant.

Complainant states that he is ready to compromise the matter if a total amount of `7,80,000/- is paid which would include the cheque amount as

well as the Court fee, which offer made by the complainant is accepted by the counsel for the petitioner, who states that the petitioner be granted

interim bail to make arrangements for the remaining amount which would be paid to respondent No.1 within two months from the date of his

release from the custody.

In view of the above, petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala, till 17.04.2018.

Adjourned to 03.04.2018 for further consideration and payment of remaining amount.â€​

In compliance with the above observations and the compromise which was sought to be entered into between the parties, a demand draft dated

31.03.2018 drawn in the name of the complainant Darshan Singh son of Tara Singh amounting to `4,05,000/- has been produced in Court, which

has been handed over to Darshan Singh son of Tara Singh.

In the light of the above, Darshan Singh-respondent No.1-complainant states that he has no objection in case the sentence of the applicant-

appellant is reduced to the one already undergone. He further states that he would withdraw the civil suit, which has been preferred by him for

recovery of the said amount of `7,50,000/-.

In the light of the above, as the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, the conviction of the petitioner is upheld, however, the sentence

stands reduced to the period already undergone.

Bail/surety bonds furnished by the petitioner stand discharged.

The revision petition stands disposed of.

In the light of the disposal of the petition, application for suspension of sentence i.e. CRM No.35867 of 2017 has been rendered infructuous.

Disposed of as such.