[2026:RJ-JP:10292]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 295/2026 Rajeshwar Dayal Son of Shri Phool Singh, Resident Of Poonam Colony, Durga Vihar, Kota Junction, Kota (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Kota)

----Accused-Petitioner Versus Lallan Prasad Sharma son of Late Ramlakhan, R/o Gali No 12, New Basti Sogriya, Kota (Raj.)

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lokesh Gopalia, Advocate alongwith Mr. Lallan Prasad Sharma, Complainant present-in- person HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

10/03/2026 :

By way of filing the present revision petition under Section

438 r/w Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner has challenged the judgment dt.18.03.2025 passed by Court of ld. Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases), No.1, Kota, in Criminal Case No.81/2023, whereby ld. Magistrate has convicted the petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act & sentenced him to undergo one year simple imprisonment & ordered to pay a sum of Rs.5,88,600/- to the complainant, as compensation, and in default thereof, to further undergo three months additional simple imprisonment.

The petitioner has also challenged the judgment dt.06.02.2026 passed by Court of ld. Additional Sessions Judge, No.4, Kota, in Criminal Regular Appeal No.213/2025, whereby ld. Judge, while dismissing the aforesaid appeal, has confirmed the judgment of conviction & the order of sentence dt.18.03.2025 passed by the ld.

Magistrate.

Facts of the present case, in brief, are that the complainant-

respondent filed a complaint u/s.138 of N.I. Act against the petitioner before ld. trial Court alleging therein that the petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.5,40,000/- from the complainant for his personal need. For repayment of the said amount, the petitioner issued a cheque for Rs.5,40,000/-, which on presentation was dishonoured with the remarks "Exceeds Arrangements". The trial Court convicted the petitioner for alleged offence & sentenced him to undergo maximum period of one year simple imprisonment alongwith a fine. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, petitioner preferred an appeal before ld. Appellate Court, which was also dismissed, while confirming the conviction &

sentence awarded by the ld. Magistrate. Hence, this revision. Submissions of learned counsel appearing for the accused-

petitioner are that the petitioner was on bail during the trial as well as the appeal, and presently, he is confined in jail. During the pendency of the present revision petition, both the parties i.e. son of the petitioner (Pravesh Kumar) & the complainant have entered into a compromise & the dispute between them has been amicably settled. The complainant has received the disputed amount. No dispute now remains pending. Therefore, the present petition may be allowed, the impugned judgments be quashed & set aside and the petitioner be acquitted from the charges levelled against him.

In this regard, an application bearing Inward No.1/2026 dt.06.03.2026 has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner praying therein that while taking on record the compromise dt.27.02.2026, the present petition may be disposed of in terms of the compromise.

Mr. Lallan Prasad Sharma, the complainant/respondent alongwith his Counsel Mr. Lokesh Gopalia is present-in-person before this Court. He does not wish to continue the matter & has no objection, if the impugned judgments are quashed & set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges levelled against him in terms of compromise.

Heard both the parties. Perused the impugned judgments &

the material made available on record.

The dispute is inter-se in between the parties and does not affect the society at large. The complainant has now entered into a compromise with the present petitioner. As per aforesaid compromise, the complainant has received the disputed amount.

The aim & purpose