Vinod Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26268) on 28 May, 2025

0
1


Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Vinod Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26268) on 28 May, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Garg

Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg

[2025:RJ-JD:26268]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 662/2025

Vinod Kumar S/o Om Prakash, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Ranjeetpura Tehsil And District Hanumangarh (District Jail
Bikaner)
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Mohanlal S/o Hetram, R/o Chak 14 Bpm Tehsil Rawatsar
         District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan)
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Nishant Motsara
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, PP
                                Mr. Tarun Dhaka for respondent No.2



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Order

28/05/2025

An application (IA No.21046) has been filed under Section 5

of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the criminal

revision petition has been filed by the petitioner.

For the reasons and grounds mentioned in the application,

the application is allowed. Delay in filing criminal revision petition

is, hereby, condoned.

This revision petition has been filed against the judgment

dated 30.06.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge No.1, Nohar, District Hanumangarh in Criminal Appeal

No.71/2018 by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was

dismissed and the judgment dated 28.05.2018 passed by the

learned Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Rawatsar, District

(Downloaded on 29/05/2025 at 09:49:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26268] (2 of 3) [CRLR-662/2025]

Hanumangarh in Crl. Case No.429/2011 convicting and sentencing

the petitioner for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been

affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo one year & six

months’ simple imprisonment along with fine in the sum of

Rs.3,50,000/- in default of payment of fine, to further undergo

fifteen days’ S.I.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

and complainant-respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise

in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.2 has received all

the amount from the petitioner and does not want to proceed with

the matter, therefore the sentence of imprisonment awarded to

the petitioner may be set aside. The copy of the compromise is

already placed on record.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 concurs with the facts

stated by the counsel for the petitioner.

I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for

the parties and perused the compromise deed.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,

since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant

respondent No.2 has accepted the sum towards full and final

settlement of dispute on the satisfaction of the complainant and in

the light of provisions of Section 147 of NI Act and in view of law

laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S.

Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663, the

sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138

NI Act is liable to be set aside. However, since the compromise has

(Downloaded on 29/05/2025 at 09:49:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26268] (3 of 3) [CRLR-662/2025]

been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the

petitioner, a cost of 10% of the cheque amount deserves to be

imposed upon the petitioner in light of the decision rendered by

the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra).

Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment

awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act

vide judgment dated 30.06.2022 and 28.05.2018 are hereby set

aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to

deposition of cost of 10% of the cheque amount. The cost shall be

deposited by the petitioner before the Rajasthan State Legal

Services Authority, Jodhpur within a period of one month from

today. In case, the cost is not deposited by the petitioner before

the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within the

stipulated period, the revision petition may be listed before this

Court for passing appropriate orders.

The revision petition is allowed in the above terms.

Suspension of sentence application also stands decided

accordingly.

A copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal

Services Authority, Jodhpur.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
137-Rashi/-

(Downloaded on 29/05/2025 at 09:49:43 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here