SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Jhk) 421

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Hiralal Sahu @ Heeralal, son of Late Gobardhan Sahu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 649 of 2025
Decided on : 29-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Ms. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate

Courts should encourage compounding of Section 138 NI Act offences under Section 147 upon settlement, prioritizing compensatory aspect over punitive, allowing acquittal post-conviction.

Headnote:(A) Negotiable Instrument Act - Sections 138 and 147 - Cheque dishonour - Conviction under Section 138 with sentence of simple imprisonment for six months and compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- - Appeal dismissed - Criminal revision filed - Parties compromised - Payments made including Rs.2,00,000/- earlier, Rs.2,80,000/- cash in court, and Rs.1,20,000/- demand draft to be revalidated - Offence compoundable - Courts to encourage compounding prioritizing compensatory over punitive aspect - Reference to Supreme Court holding that conviction can be quashed post-compounding even without consent in interest of justice - Judgments of conviction and appeal set aside, petitioner acquitted - Provisional bail confirmed. (Paras 2,5,9,10)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner convicted for cheque dishonour, appeal dismissed. Parties settled dispute, made full compensation payments in court presence, sought compounding.

Findings of Court:
Compounding allowed, judgments set aside, acquittal ordered, with direction for revalidation of demand draft within two weeks, liberty to complainant if not complied.

Issues: Whether to permit compounding of offence under Section 138 post-conviction and affirm acquittal upon settlement and payment.

Ratio Decidendi: Offences under NI Act are regulatory and compoundable; courts must prioritize compensation, encourage settlements to reduce pendency, quashing conviction appropriate when parties compromise.

Result: Criminal revision allowed.

Table of Content
1. criminal revision against conviction under section 138 ni act on compromise grounds. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. parties effectuate compromise through compensation payments and draft revalidation. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. ni act offences compoundable prioritizing compensatory over punitive aspects per supreme court. (Para 9 , 10)
4. conviction set aside, bail confirmed upon compounding and payment compliance. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Kumari Rashmi, learned counsel appearing for the State and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the complainant/opposite party no.2

2. This criminal revision petition has been filed for setting-aside the judgment dated 25.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-X, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No.291/2024 (arising out of Complaint Case No.6856/2022), whereby, the learned appellate court has been pleased to dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioner and affirm the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.07.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No.6856/2022, whereby, the petitioner has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and he has been sentenced to undergo S.I.for six months along with payment of compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- and in default of payment of compensation, he has been further sentenced to undergo S.I. for three months. He further submits that the matter is arising under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. He further submits that for dishonouring of the cheque, the said complaint case has been filed and the learned court has been pleased to direct the petitioner to pay compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-. He then submits that now a good sense has prevailed between the parties and the matter has been compromised. He next submits that pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 23.09.2025, the petitioner has already paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant/ opposite party no.2 and, thereafter, on that day, the petitioner was granted provisional bail. He also submits that the petitioner has deposited demand draft of Rs.1,20,000/- in the name of the complainant before the learned court. He further submits that the petitioner is present in person in Court along with cash of Rs.2,80,000/- and the same will be handed over to the complainant/ opposite party no.2.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant/opposite party no.2 submits that opposite party no.2 is also present in person in the Court.

4. The petitioner who is present in the Court will hand over cash of Rs.2,80,000/- to opposite party no.2, who is also present in the Court on proper identification by the learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the aforesaid payment and demand draft deposited before the learned Court, this matter may kindly be disposed of as the matter is compoundable under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant/opposite party no.2 accepts the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and submits that sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was already received by the complainant/opposite party no.2 and opposite party no.2 is ready to accept the sum of Rs.2,80,000/- in cash. He next submits that so far as bank draft of Rs.1,20,000/- is concerned, that bank draft is required to be revalidated as the period of validity has already expired.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that proper direction may kindly be issued so that the bank draft will be taken up from the learned Court and the petitioner will revalidate the same and hand over the fresh bank draft to opposite party no.2.

8. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to approach the learned trial court for taking over the sa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top