[2026:RJ-JD:3118]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1328/2024 Bherulal S/o Shri Bhawarlal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 182, Tulsidas Ki Sarai, Naya Khet, Dabok, Udaipur (Raj)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Omprakash Bansal S/o Shri Tulsi Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o-4, Matakripa, Shantivan, Bedla Road, Near Alok School, District Udaipur (Raj.)

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ojas Shakdweepiya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA Mr. Himanshu Soni HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

19/01/2026

1. The instant criminal revision petition under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the BNSS has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No.113/2024, whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.02.2024 passed by the earned Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.6, Udaipur in Criminal Regular Case No.16788/2015, convicting the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year alongwith compensation to the tune of Rs.80,000/-, was affirmed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the present revision petition, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a compromise was arrived at between them on 03.01.2026. It is submitted that the entire due amount has been paid to the complainant-respondent in full satisfaction of his claim. It is further submitted that the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is compoundable in nature and, in view of the full payment having been made, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings. It is also pointed out that the petitioner is not in custody and is presently on bail.

3. Learned counsel for the complainant-respondent, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of compromise and receipt of the entire due amount and submits that the complainant has no objection if the offence is compounded and the judgments passed by both the Courts below are quashed and set aside.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent and perused the material available on record.

5. In the facts of the present case, it is not in dispute that the entire due amount has been paid by the petitioner to the complainant-respondent pursuant to the compromise dated 03.01.2026. The complainant-respondent has received the full amount towards the cheque in question and has expressed his consent for compounding of the offence. The offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act being compoundable in nature, and the dispute having been settled in entirety, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of the conviction would serve no fruitful purpose and the matter deserves to be given a quietus.

6. Upon due consideration of the submissions made and in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, this Court deems it fit and proper to allow the instant criminal revision petition.

7. Accordingly, the instant criminal revision petition is allowed. The judgment dated 26.02.2024 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.6, Udaipur in Criminal Regular Case No.16788/2015 and the judgment dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No.113/2024 are hereby quashed and set aside, and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner shall be released forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.

8. All pending applications stand disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J C-2-Samvedana/-