Santosh Kumar Bhattacharya vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

This is a criminal revision filed under Section 438/442 of BNSS, 2023 against the judgment and order dated 17.08.2022, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No.1428 of 2021, Juber Ahmed vs. Santosh Kumar Bhattacharya, whereby the revisionist was convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo one year’s S.I. with fine of Rs.11,00,000/-, out of which, an amount of compensation of Rs.10,80,000/- was directed to be paid to the respondent no.2 (complainant) along with default stipulation of one months’ additional S.I. as well as the judgment and order dated 20.08.2025, passed by learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No.185 of 2022, Santosh Kumar Bhattacharya vs. State of Uttarakhand & another, which too was dismissed by learned appellate court and the judgment and order dated 17.08.2022 by which the revisionist was convicted and sentenced was affirmed.

Along with criminal revision, joint compounding application (IA No.1/2025) has been filed by the parties.

The present criminal revision has been filed on the premise that parties have entered into compromise and settled the dispute amicably by making the payment of amount under disputed cheque to the respondent no.2-Juber Ahmed.

Since the revisionist is in jail, hence the compounding application and affidavit in support thereof has been filed and signed by his son Arunesh Bhattacharya who has duly been authorized by his father (revisionist/accused). The application is supported by separate affidavits of the parties in which it is mainly stated that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and since the amount under cheque has been received by respondent no.2, therefore, there is no reason to continue with the aforesaid proceedings.

Revisionist is in jail. His son Mr. Arunesh Bhattacharya is doing pairvi on his behalf, who is present before this Court, being duly identified by his counsel. Respondent no.2-Juber Ahmed is also present before this Court duly identified by his counsel.

It is categorically stated before the Court that the revisionist has already deposited 15% of the amount of compensation in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907 before the trial court. The same be deposited in the government exchequer, if not already done.

On interaction with respondent no.2-Juber Ahmed, he has stated before the Court that he has received the full amount under cheque and he does not want to pursue with the case anymore.

Since the parties have settled the dispute amicably and do not want to pursue the aforesaid criminal case, therefore, there is no useful purpose for keeping this criminal case pending. The judgments and orders passed by learned trial court as well as appellate court impugned in this criminal revision deserve to be set-aside.

Accordingly, compounding application (IA/1/2025) is allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. With the result, the judgment and order dated 17.08.2022, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No.1428 of 2021, Juber Ahmed vs. Santosh Kumar Bhattacharya, as well as the judgment and order dated 20.08.2025, passed by learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No.185 of 2022, Santosh Kumar Bhattacharya vs. State of Uttarakhand & another, are hereby set-aside,

Revisionist is in jail. He is directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.

Present criminal revision thus stands allowed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.