Jasmel Singh vs State Of Rajasthan and Another

Vijay Bishnoi, J

This criminal revision petition has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 29.09.2014 passed by the Special

Judicial Magistrate (NI Act Cases) No. 1, Sri. Ganganagar (for short ‘the trial court’) whereby, the trial court has convicted the petitioner for

the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him for one years SI and to pay Rs. 6,00,000/- as compensation to the

complainant. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 31.07.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Sri. Ganganagar (for short

‘the appellate court’) whereby, the appellate court while setting aside the aforesaid order of the trial court has convicted the petitioner for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced him for two years SI and to pay Rs. 8,42,670/- as compensation to the complainant.

Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that compromise has been arrived at between the parties on 07.02.2020. Learned counsel for the

petitioner has submitted that in view of the fact that the parties have entered into compromise, the impugned orders under challenge may kindly be set

aside and the petitioner be acquitted from the charge of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and the respondent No. 2 does not want to

press the charges for the offence punishable under Section 138 NI Act against the petitioner.

Section 147 of the N.I. Act reads as under:â€

“Section 147. Offences to be compoundable.-Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every

offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.â€​

As per Section 147 of the N.I. Act, every offence punishable under this Act is compoundable.

In the above facts and circumstances of the case, this criminal revision petition is allowed. The impugned orders are set aside. The petitioner is

acquitted from the charge under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

However, in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., reported

in (2010) 5 SCC 663 : AIR 2010 SC 1907, the petitioner is directed to deposit 15% of the cheque amount by way of cost before the Legal Services

Authority, Sri. Ganganagar within a period of one month from today.

A copy of this order be sent to the Legal Services Authority, Sri. Ganganagar with a remark that if 15% of the cheque amount is not deposited by

the petitioner within the stipulated time, the Legal Services Authority, Sri. Ganganagar shall brought this fact into notice of this Court.