Full Text
Translation output
#34
% 16.08.2011
Present: Mr.Vishal Sehijpal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. jasbir Kaur, APP for the respondent No.l/State.
Respondent No. 2/complainant in person with Mr. Suhail Khan, Advocate.
+Crl.
M.A. No. 9587/2011(Exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
Cri.M.A.No.9585/2011(condonation of delay)
Heard, in view of the reasons given in the application, delay in filing the revision petition is condoned.
Application stands disposed of.
Cri.M.A.9586/2011 & Cri.Rev.P.364/2011, Cri.M.B. 1421/2011
The petitioner, vide
% 16.08.2011
Present: Mr.Vishal Sehijpal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. jasbir Kaur, APP for the respondent No.l/State.
Respondent No. 2/complainant in person with Mr. Suhail Khan, Advocate.
+Crl.
M.A. No. 9587/2011(Exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
Cri.M.A.No.9585/2011(condonation of delay)
Heard, in view of the reasons given in the application, delay in filing the revision petition is condoned.
Application stands disposed of.
Cri.M.A.9586/2011 & Cri.Rev.P.364/2011, Cri.M.B. 1421/2011
The petitioner, vide
JUDGMENT
dated 24th April, 2010 passed by learned M.M., Patiala House Courts and the order on sentence dated 28th April, 2010 has been convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 138, N.I.Act. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 31.03.2011. Aggrieved by the dismissal of his appeal, the petitioner has preferred the revision.
In the revision petition, the petitioner has moved instant application being Cri.M.A. 9586/2011 under Section 147 of the N.I.Act, seeking compounding of the offence under Section 138 N.I.Act.
Respondent No. 2 Ashok Kumar is present. He is identified by his counsel Sh.Suhail Khan, Advocate. Respondent No. 2 states that after the
2011:DHC:19867
B conviction of the petitioner, he visited the family members of the petitioner. There he found that the petitioner has undergone a financial crisis and for that reason, the petitioner could not pay the amount of the dishonoured cheque despite of service of demand notice. Otherwise, he had no guilty intention to cheat or defraud him. In view of the above, respondent No. 2 states that he has voluntarily compounded the offence under Section 138 N.I.Act with the petitioner and he does not want him to be punished for the aforesaid offence. Respondent No. 2 states that in support of the application and in confirmation of the compounding of offence, he has sworn an affidavit on 12th August, 2011, which is part of the record.
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.
As the respondent No. 2 Ashok Kumar (complainant) has voluntarily compounded the offence with the petitioner, I allow the compounding of the offence under Section 138, N.I.Act. In view of the compounding of offence, the conviction of the appellant under Section 138, N.I.Act is set aside and he is acquitted of the charge.
Application being Cri.M.A. 9583/2011 as well as the revision petition along with the miscellaneous application stands disposed of.
Petitioner is stated to be in judicial custody. Jail Superintendent concerned is directed to release the petitioner forthwith, if not required in any other case.
G
Copy of the order be sent to jail Superintendent through Special
Messenger for information and necessary action.
AUGUST 16, 2011 akb
Jv
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
_________,_
----'~
-,----------..I-
In the revision petition, the petitioner has moved instant application being Cri.M.A. 9586/2011 under Section 147 of the N.I.Act, seeking compounding of the offence under Section 138 N.I.Act.
Respondent No. 2 Ashok Kumar is present. He is identified by his counsel Sh.Suhail Khan, Advocate. Respondent No. 2 states that after the
2011:DHC:19867
B conviction of the petitioner, he visited the family members of the petitioner. There he found that the petitioner has undergone a financial crisis and for that reason, the petitioner could not pay the amount of the dishonoured cheque despite of service of demand notice. Otherwise, he had no guilty intention to cheat or defraud him. In view of the above, respondent No. 2 states that he has voluntarily compounded the offence under Section 138 N.I.Act with the petitioner and he does not want him to be punished for the aforesaid offence. Respondent No. 2 states that in support of the application and in confirmation of the compounding of offence, he has sworn an affidavit on 12th August, 2011, which is part of the record.
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.
As the respondent No. 2 Ashok Kumar (complainant) has voluntarily compounded the offence with the petitioner, I allow the compounding of the offence under Section 138, N.I.Act. In view of the compounding of offence, the conviction of the appellant under Section 138, N.I.Act is set aside and he is acquitted of the charge.
Application being Cri.M.A. 9583/2011 as well as the revision petition along with the miscellaneous application stands disposed of.
Petitioner is stated to be in judicial custody. Jail Superintendent concerned is directed to release the petitioner forthwith, if not required in any other case.
G
Copy of the order be sent to jail Superintendent through Special
Messenger for information and necessary action.
AUGUST 16, 2011 akb
Jv
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
_________,_
----'~
-,----------..I-