[2025:RJ-JD:53226]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1396/2025 Rakesh Pujari S/o Ashok Kumar, Aged About 45 Years, House No 14 C Bhatti Ki Baori Opp Hutch Mobile Tower Chopasani Housing Board Jodhpur Raj ----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Thruogh Public Prosecutor

2. Jitendra Acharya S/o Khemraj Acharya, 9/592 Chopasani Housing Board Jodhpur Raj ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kachawaha Mr. Ayub Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP Mr. Ashish Mathur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

08/12/2025 The matter has come up on an application (IA No.01/2025)

filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing present criminal revision petition.

For reasons and grounds stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the present criminal revision petition is hereby condoned.

This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 05.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Appeal No.22/2019 by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment dated 13.02.2019 passed by the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act Cases) No.4, Jodhpur Metropolitan, in Criminal Original Case No.75/2015 convicting and has been affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo three months’ simple imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.2,40,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo 15 days’ simple imprisonment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant-respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise and the respondent No.2 has received the whole 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.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 concurs with the facts stated by the counsel for the petitioner.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and prayed for dismissal of the instant criminal revision petition, however, he does not dispute the fact that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties.

I have heard 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 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 Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S.

Borcar & Anr. (2025 INSC 1158), the sentence awarded to the aside. However, since the compromise has been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, a cost of 7.5% 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 Sanjabij Tari (supra).

Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgments dated 13.02.2019 and 05.04.2025 is hereby set aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to deposition of cost of 7.5% 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. The application for suspension of sentence is also decided accordingly.

A copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur.

(MUKESH RA