JUDGMENT :

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral)

1. The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 10.11.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana vide which the appeal preferred by the accused-petitioners against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.01.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana has been dismissed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant/respondent No.2-M/s Khalsa Brothers was a proprietorship Firm and was doing the business of supplying tent, furniture material and the accused/respondent No.1-M/s Trimohan Inns Pvt. Ltd. was a Private Limited Company having Hotel Business at Phillaur, District Jalandhar. The accused/respondent No.2-Sham Mohan Sharma, Director of M/s Trimohan Inns Pvt. Ltd. (accused-respondent No.1) was responsible for all the acts, conducts and business of the company. The accused-petitioner No.2 ordered the complainant firm to supply the tent furniture, catering and other goods and issued three cheques bearing No. 293113 dated 05.05.1999, 293111 dated 15.05.1999 and 293114 dated 25.05.1999 for a sum of Rs.50,000/-each (totalling Rs.1,50,000/-) drawn on State Bank of India, Phillaur on account of payment of the bill, in favour of the complainant-respondent firm with the assurance that the same would be encashed. The complainant-respondent presented the aforesaid cheques for encashment through his Banker which were returned to the complainant/respondent as dishonoured with remarks "Exceeds Arrangements" vide memo dated 12.06.1999. The accused/petitioner No.2 was served with a legal notice dated 29.06.1999 for the repayment of the aforesaid amount but he failed to make the payment within the stipulated period of 15 days, leading to initiation of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

3. In the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by the complainant/respondent, the accused/petitioner No.2 was summoned to face trial. The evidence was led and ultimately, the accused/petitioner No.2-Sham Mohan Sharma was held guilty and accordingly, convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and was sentenced as under:-

4. Aggrieved against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the accused/petitioners preferred an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, which came to be dismissed on 10.11.2010.

5. Still aggrieved, the present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that during the pendency of the revision petition, a compromise has been effected between the parties for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to be paid to the complainant-respondent firm by the petitioners. In pursuant thereof, he has handed over a cheque bearing No.119339 dated 06.03.2025 in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the learned Amicus Curiae for the complainant-respondent in the Court today. A photocopy thereof has been placed on record. He further submits that the Trial Court be directed to release a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (already deposited with it in compliance of the order dated 17.11.2010) in favour of the complainant-respondent on account of payment of the remaining amount of Rs.3,00,000/- as full and final settlement. Therefore, nothing shall remain due towards the complainant-respondent firm. He further contends that in view of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 320 Cr.P.C. where a settlement has been effected, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded on account of the fact that a mutual compromise has been effected between the parties.

7. The learned Amicus Curiae for the complainant-respondent contends that as the matter has been settled between the parties, she has no objectio