ORDER :

The present revision petition has been filed by the accused who was convicted by the Court of the Civil Judge & J.M.F.C. at Pandavapura, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the “Trial Court”) by its order dated 14-08-2015, in C.C.No.292/2010 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the “N.I. Act”) and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of six months and also to pay the fine twice the cheque amount of Rs.1,50,000/-and in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.5019/2015 in the Court of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mandya (sitting at Srirangapattana) (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the “Sessions Judge’s Court”), which by its impugned judgment dated 25-06-2016 dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court.

Aggrieved by the impugned judgments and order on sentence, the accused has preferred the present revision petition.

2. The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court in C.C.No.292/2010 is that, the accused who is the petitioner herein, who had availed loan of a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-from him on 10-12-2009, had issued the cheque in question towards the repayment of the loan, which cheque when presented for its realisation, came to be dishonored and returned from the drawee Bank with reason of “funds insufficient”. Thereafter, though a demand was made by serving the legal notice upon the accused to pay the cheque amount, still, he did not meet the demand, which constrained the complainant to institute a criminal case against him before the Trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

3. As observed above, after contest, the Trial Court held the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him accordingly. Challenging the said judgment, a criminal appeal in Criminal Appeal No.5019/2015 was filed by the accused, which also came to be dismissed, while confirming the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court.

4. When this matter is listed today, learned counsels from both side along with the petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant as identified by them are physically present in the Court and they file an application I.A.No.2/2021 under Section 147 of the N.I. Act, and also file a joint affidavit.

5. In both the joint application as well as the joint affidavit, they have sought permission for compounding the offence and to set aside the impugned judgments and order on sentence and acquit the accused of the alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

6. Learned counsels from both side make their submissions supporting the joint application and the joint affidavit of the parties. The parties who are physically present and identified by their respective learned counsels also make their submissions on line with the joint application and the joint affidavit under consideration.

7. In the present joint application and joint affidavit filed by both parties, who are identified by their learned counsels in the application as well the affidavit also, they have stated that both of them have settled the matter and the present respondent (complainant) has got no objection to set aside the impugned judgments and to acquit the present petitioner (accused) for the alleged offence. The respondent herein(complainant) has also stated that the Trial Court be directed to release/refund the deposited amount to the petitioner/accused.

8. The enquiry made with the parties who are physically present convinces the Court that both the parties out of their free consent and volition and in their best interest have settled the matter which is further corroborated by the submissions made by their learn