IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
Gurprit Singh @ Gurpreet Singh Pannu - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Revision No. 461 of 2025
Decided on : 08-05-2025
JUDGMENT :
This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 05.02.2024 passed by Sri Abhas Verma, learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Jamshedpur in Cr. Appeal No.171 of 2023 by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.07.2023 passed by Ms. Monica Srivastava, learned Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Jamshedpur in Complaint Case No.108 of 2020 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I Act and sentenced to under S.I for six (06) months and to pay compensation of Rs.3,56,000/- to the complainant under section 357(3) Cr.P.C.
2. I.A. No.5283 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and the O.P. No.2 by way of Joint Compromise Petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2 and the petitioner has deposited Demand Draft of Rs.2,75,000/- before the office of the learned Registrar General and the petitioner has no objection if the O.P. No.2 withdraw the said Demand Draft deposited before the learned Registrar General and hence the impugned judgments passed by the learned Appellate Court as well as the learned Trial Court may be set aside and the petitioner may be acquitted.
4. Learned APP for the State has raised no objection.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 also raised no objection and submitted that the case has been compromised. However, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 further submitted that the O.P. No.2 may be permitted to withdraw the said Demand Draft of Rs.2,75,000/- submitted before the office of the learned Registrar General by the petitioner and hence necessary order may be passed.
6. Perused the records of this case and I.A. No.5283 of 2025.
7. It appears that petitioner has already been exempted from surrendering before the learned Court vide order dated 01.05.2025 and he has already deposited Demand Draft of Rs.2,75,000/- in the office of learned Registrar General pursuant to order dated 05.03.2025 passed by this Court.
8. Paragraph No.1, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the I.A. No.5283 of 2025 read as follows:-
“Para-1:- That the present interlocutory application is being filed jointly by the petitioner and the opposite party no.2 pursuant to an amicable settlement arrived at between the parties for resolving their dispute outside the Court, whereby a sum of Rs.2,75,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Seventy-Five Thousand only) has been agreed upon as full and final settlement of the compensation amount awarded to opposite party no.2.
Para-6:- That during the pendency of the present criminal revision, the parties have arrived at an amicable resolution, wherein opposite party no.2 has agreed to receive Rs.2,75,000/- as full and final settlement of the compensation amount.
Para-7:- That the petitioner undertakes to make the aforesaid payment of Rs.2,75,000/- as an when a final order is passed by this Hon’ble Court accepting the terms of compromise.
Para-8:- That in furtherance of the said compromise, the petitioner has issued a Demand Draft bearing No.533825 dated 22.04.2025 in favour of opposite party no.2. The said Demand Draft shall remain deposited in the custody of the Hon’ble Registrar General of this Hon’ble Court until final disposal of the matter, in terms of the previous direction issued by this Hon’ble Court.
Para-9:- That the respondents undertake that they will receive the DD upon passing of the order of this Hon’ble High Court.”
9. It appears that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2 and the petitioner has deposited Demand Draft of Rs.2,75,000/- in the office of the learned Registrar General and there is no grievance between the parties now.
10. Under the circumstances, the judgment dated 05.02.2024 passed by Sri Abhas Verma, learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Jamshedpur in Cr. Appeal No
AI
A compromise between parties in a criminal case can lead to the acquittal of the accused if the settlement is accepted by the court.
In cases of compromise between the parties, a court may set aside a conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act if the complainant has no grievance against the accused.
The power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised to secure the ends of justice, allowing for the compounding of the offence and quashing of judgments and orders.
The offence under Section 138 of the NI Act can be compounded if the parties reach a settlement and the compensation is fully paid.
Compromise between parties can lead to acquittal and reversal of conviction under IPC sections 420 and 406.
The court allows the compounding of an offence under the Negotiable Instrument Act following a compromise between the parties, emphasizing the importance of justice and judicial efficiency.
Compromise between parties verified by court can lead to quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, promoting peace and justice.
The court allows compounding of offences under the Negotiable Instrument Act in personal disputes without public policy concerns, enabling parties to resolve matters amicably.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.