Surendra Jaiswal vs Vijay Kumar Jain on 9 February, 2023

[Cites 4, Cited by 2]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Surendra Jaiswal vs Vijay Kumar Jain on 9 February, 2023

Bench: Rajendra Kumar Verma

                                                                     1
                                      IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                          AT JABALPUR
                                                              BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                       ON THE 9 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                                     CRIMINAL REVISION No. 898 of 2010

                                     BETWEEN:-
                                     SURENDRA JAISWAL S/O INDRA PAL JAISWAL, AGED
                                     ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PROPRIETOR PRINCE
                                     LIGHT & TENT HOUSE NAV DURGA CHOWK BHAISHA
                                     KHANA P.S. SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                                     (BY SHRI MADAN SINGH - ADVOCATE)

                                     AND
                                     VIJAY KUMAR JAIN S/O MOHAN LAL, AGED ABOUT 45
                                     YE A R S , PURANA POWER HOUSE CHOWK SATNA
                                     (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
                                     (BY SHRI )

                                           T h is revision coming on for order this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                                     following:
                                                                      ORDER

Heard on I.A. No. 21514/2022 which is an application for permission of compromise and I.A. No. 21516/2022 which is an application for compromise under Section 145 of N.I. Act and under Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C jointly filed by the petitioner as well as respondent.

Instant Criminal Revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 Signature Not Verified SAN of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the Judgment Digitally signed by AMITABH RANJAN Date: 2023.02.14 17:59:02 IST dated 28.05.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satna 2 District Satna (M.P.) in CRA No. 253/2009, affirming the judgment dated 09.10.2009 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Satna in Criminal Case No. 442/2009, whereby the learned court below has convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one and a fine of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Three Lakhs only) as compensation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parties of the case have entered into out of court settlement, respondent has already been received the entire compensation amount of Rs.2,20,000/-.

Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant submitted that, the parties have entered into settlement. Respondent has already received Rs.2,20,000/- from the petitioner, in addition to above if the amount deposited by petitioner be returned to the respondent, then he has no objection to compromise the matter.

Factum of compromise has been recorded and verified by the Registrar (Judicial-II) wherein respondent as well as petitioner have stated on oath that they have entered into compromise.

Since, the parties of the case have entered into settlement and respondent has already received the entire cheque amount of Rs.2,20,000/-, I.A. No. 21514/2022 and I.A. No. 21516/2022 are allowed.

O n due consideration, and looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that parties of the case have entered Signature Not Verified SAN into compromise and the respondent has already been received the cheque Digitally signed by AMITABH RANJAN Date: 2023.02.14 17:59:02 IST amount, no useful purpose would be served to keep the matter pending.

In view of the aforesaid, the criminal revision is allowed and stands disposed of subject payment of cost, which shall be 15% of the cheque amount of Rs.2,20,000/- as per the guidelines issued by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs.Sayed Babalal (2010)5 SCC 663. Judgment dated 28.05.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satna District Satna in CRA No. 253/2009 is hereby set aside. Applicant is acquitted from the charges of Section 138 of N.I. Act.

On being deposition of 15% of the cheque amount by the petitioner as compounding fee, with the District Legal Service Authority, Satna (M.P.), within a period of one month from today, the bail bonds submitted by the petitioner stands discharged. It is made clear that, in case of non- deposition of compounding fee, this order shall stands cancelled without further reference to this Court and the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satna District Satna in CRA No. 253/2009 shall be upheld.

All the pending interlocutory applications be disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE Amitabh Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by AMITABH RANJAN Date: 2023.02.14 17:59:02 IST

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court