Narayan Ram vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Proposed revisionist-accused Narayan Ram was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months along with a fine of Rs. 22,000/-. Against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 08.10.2021, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh in Complaint Case No. 881 of 2019, an Appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2022) was filed. The said Appeal has been dismissed vide judgment dated 02.06.2023, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh.

Revisionist- Narayan Ram is present with his learned counsel Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate.

Mr. Sanjay Saran, the proprietor of respondent no. 2-complainant, is present through video conferencing. He is identified by Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt, Advocate.

Heard Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate and Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt, Advocate on the Delay Condonation Application.

The said Application has not been opposed. The Delay Condonation Application is allowed. The delay of 2 days’ in preferring the Revision is condoned.

Admit.

Both, revisionist and respondent no. 2 submit that they have settled their disputes and a Compounding Application (IA No. 2 of 2023) has been filed along with their affidavits.

Mr. Sanjay Saran, proprietor of respondent no. 2-complainant, submits that he has received entire amount and he has filed his affidavit along with compounding application with his free will and without any pressure.

Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate has filed a copy of Receipt No. 20 dated 21.09.2023, issued by Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority. The said Receipt is taken on record. As per the said receipt, a sum of Rs. 3,300/- has been deposited.

Both the parties have requested to decide the present Criminal Revision on the basis of the compromise.

The present Criminal Revision (No. 622 of 2023) deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed by holding that since the offence has been compounded, the revisionist is entitled to acquittal.

Consequently, the judgment of the Appellate Court dated 02.06.2023 and the judgment of learned Trial Court dated 08.10.2021 are set aside and the revisionist is ordered to be acquitted of the charge levelled against him.