Urmila Sharma vs Harwinder Singh

Sabina, J.—Petitioner had faced trial qua commission of offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short- "the Act"). The trial Court, vide judgment/ order dated 5.12.2008 convicted and sentenced the petitioner for commission of offence punishable u/s 138 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said judgment/order, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 5.7.2012 by the Appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now during the pendency of the petition, parties have arrived at a compromise. The entire amount in question has been paid to the respondent by the petitioner.

Respondent, who is present in person along with his counsel, has admitted the factum of compromise effected between the parties and has stated that he has no objection if the revision petition filed by the petitioner is accepted. In this regard he has tendered his affidavit on record.

As per Section 147 of the Act, every offence punishable under the Act shall be compoundable.

Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and the offence u/s 138 of the Act is compoundable, parties are permitted to compound the offence.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Petitioner is acquitted of the notice of accusation served on him as the offence has been compounded. Petitioner, who is in custody, be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required in any other criminal case.