[2025:RJ-JP:50805]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 2005/2025 Satyanarayan S/o. Bhanwar Lal, R/o. Village Gadh Ki Gali, Laava, Tehsil Malpura, District Tonk (Raj.) (Petitioner Is Currently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. Gajanand S/o. Late Sh. Laxmi Narayan, R/o. Village Madhorajpura, Tehsil Faagi, District Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP Mr. Pawan Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Gajanand, respondent No.2 present in person HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

16/12/2025

1. This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 28.10.2025 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Faagi, District Jaipur (for short ‘the Appellate Court’), whereby appeal filed by him against the judgment and order dated 29.10.2024 passed by Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faagi, District Jaipur (for short ‘the trial Court’) has been dismissed.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after passing of judgment of Appellate Court, parties have entered into a compromise on 05.12.2025, which is taken on record. It is submitted that vide judgment dated 29.10.2024 passed by the trial Court, while convicting the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act, sentence of one year simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,60,000/- was imposed upon the petitioner. The aforesaid judgment was unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner and the appeal has been dismissed vide judgment dated 28.10.2025 and the judgment of trial Court dated 29.10.2024 has been confirmed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act is compoundable in nature in view of Section 147 of N.I. Act. Recently in the case of Gian Chand Garg Vs. Harpal Singh & Anr. decided on 11.08.2025 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.8050/2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after considering the earlier judgments has held that such compromise can be entered into by the parties at any stage, so far as the cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act is concerned.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into compromise and has also admitted that complainant has received the due amount and has executed the compromise without any influence of portion.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the Criminal Revision Petition.

6. Complainant is present in person and he does not dispute that compromise has been entered into between the parties.

7. In the light of above facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the submissions made by the parties, where the parties have entered into compromise, in view of provisions of Section 147 of N.I. Act as well as the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Chand Garg (Supra)

the present revision petition deserves to be allowed.

8. The Criminal Revision Petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The judgment dated 28.10.2025 passed by the Appellate Court as well as judgment dated 29.10.2024 passed by the trial Court are hereby quashed and set aside. The petitioner stands discharged of all the charges.

9. The Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application stands disposed of.

10. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

11. Authorities are directed to prepare releasing order accordingly.

(ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /65