Full Text
CRL.REV.P. 711/2014 & Crl.M.B.11014/2014
P K GADODIA
Petitioner
Through : Mr.Harish K.Dua withMr.Arvind Chaudhary, Advocates, along with the wife ofthe petitioner present in person. f"
Through : Counsel forthe respondent (appearance not given) alongwith the respondent present in person.
P K GADODIA
Through : Mr.Harish K.Dua with Mr.Arvind ^ Chaudhary, Advocates, along with the wife ofthe petitionerpresentin person.
Crl.Rev.P.No.711/14 &connected matters Page 1of^
2015:DHC:11232
P K GODODIA person.
P K GODODIA person.
Crl.Rev.P.No.711/14 & connected matters Pagie2of5
27.01.2015 Crl.M.A.No.1063/2015 in Crl.Rev.P.711/2014
Crl.M.A.No.1062/2015 in Crl.Rev.P.712/2014 Crl.M.A.No.1057/2015 in CrLRev.P.713/2014
Crl.M.A.No.1058/2015 in CrLRev.P.714/2014
ORDER
1. The above four criminal revision petitions have been preferred by the petitioner. These petitions have been directed against the impugned order dated 26.09.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-03 (Central), bywhich in appeal the findings recorded bythe learned ACMM- 01 (Central) in the complaint cases under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act were confirmed by the composite order.
2. In Crl.Rev.P.No.711/2013, the petitioner was sentence:d to undergo SI for one year with fine ?2,97,044/-; in Crl.Rev.P.No.712/2014, the sentence awarded was SI for one year with fine of ?1,23,480/-; in Crl.Rev.P.No.713/2014 the sentence was SI for one year with fine ^1,80,800 and in Crl.Rev.P.No.714/2014, the sentence awarded was SI for one year with fine ^1,55,948/-. In all these criminal revision petitions 75% of the amount was to be paid as compensation to the complainant and the default sentence for non-payment offine was SI for two months.
3. Notice of the criminal revision petitions were given to the complainant/respondent. By order dated 09.12.2014, the substantive sentence ofthe petitioner was suspended on his depositing the fine amount imposed in each ofthe complaints with the Registrar General ofthis Court. Crl.Rev.P.No.711/14 &connected matters Page 3of[5]
4. The instant captioned appUcations have been filed by the parties to record settlement. I have made inquires from the respondent, who is present in person, if the matter has been settled amicably with the petitioner in all the revision petitions and whether the payment agreed to be made by the petitioner has since been received by him. Learned counsel for the respondent has stated that the matter has been resolved with the wife of the petitioner and the offence has since been compounded. The entire payment agreed to in the settlement has been paid to the complainant/respondent.
5. The petitioner is in custody since 26.09.2014. A joint application has been filed to record settlement. It is signed by the respondent and his counsel. It also bears signature of Kiran Gagodia, wife ofthe petitioner and his counsel. lacs have been agreed to be paid to the complainant in full and final settlement of the offence. The application is supported by the affidavits of Kiran Gagodia, wife of the petitioner and Madan Gopal Maheshwari-respondent. Deed of settlement is on record. The details ofpayment has been recorded in the settlement.
6. Since the parties have settled their disputes, the offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Acts stands compounded. The petitioner has remained in custody since 26.09.2014 and has made payment of ?9 lacs in all as full and final settlement of the dispute. Considering the peculiarcircumstances coststo compound the offence are waived.
7. The criminal revision petitions are disposed of as settled. All pending applications also stand disposed of The petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138Negotiable InstrumentsAct.
8. Copy of this order be sentto the concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary action. Trial court record be sent back along Crl.Rev.P.No.711/14 & connected matters Page 4 of[5] with a copy of this order. The petitioner shall be released forthwith if not required to be detained in any other case.