Full Text
Translation output
#45
% 02.08.2011
Present: Mr.R.K. Uppal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Bharat Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Ms. jasbir Kaur, APP for respondent No.2/State.
+Cri.Rev.P. No.340/2011 & Cri.M.(B). No.1308/2011
(0
Mr. Bharat Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1 has filed his
Vakalatnama along with certain documents, which are taken on record.
Sudhir Kumar Verma, the petitioner herein has filed Cri.Rev. against the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 19.05.2011 whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned M.M. dated 19.01.2011 pursuant to the complaint CC No.4135/2010 under Section 138 N.l. Act.
At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have arrived at a settlement and they have compounded the offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.l/complainant has received a sum of ~50,000/- vide two bank drafts for ~25,000/- each bearing
Nos.344305 and 344306 both dated 01.08.2011 drawn on UCO Bank, Delhi High Court branch and compounded the offence which is subject matter of revision. This fact is confirmed by learned counsel for respondent No.l/complainant as well as Shri Sanjay Chaudhary, authorised representative of the respondent No.1 company. Shri Sanjay
Chaudhary has filed his affidavit in token of the confirmation regarding compounding. r
2011:DHC:19847
G)
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 provides that irrespective of anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, every offence punishable under the Act is compoundable. Since the parties have amicably resolved the matter and compounded the offence, revision petition is accepted and the impugned order of conviction passed by learned M.M. dated 19.01.2011 and the order of appellate court dated
19.05.2011 are set aside and the revisionist is acquitted of the charge in view of the compounding of the offence.
The revisionist is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Petition as well as the application stand disposed of.
~
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
AUGUST 02, 2011 pst
JUDGE
-:-~
;
2011:DHC:19847
% 02.08.2011
Present: Mr.R.K. Uppal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Bharat Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Ms. jasbir Kaur, APP for respondent No.2/State.
+Cri.Rev.P. No.340/2011 & Cri.M.(B). No.1308/2011
(0
Mr. Bharat Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1 has filed his
Vakalatnama along with certain documents, which are taken on record.
Sudhir Kumar Verma, the petitioner herein has filed Cri.Rev. against the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 19.05.2011 whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned M.M. dated 19.01.2011 pursuant to the complaint CC No.4135/2010 under Section 138 N.l. Act.
At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have arrived at a settlement and they have compounded the offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.l/complainant has received a sum of ~50,000/- vide two bank drafts for ~25,000/- each bearing
Nos.344305 and 344306 both dated 01.08.2011 drawn on UCO Bank, Delhi High Court branch and compounded the offence which is subject matter of revision. This fact is confirmed by learned counsel for respondent No.l/complainant as well as Shri Sanjay Chaudhary, authorised representative of the respondent No.1 company. Shri Sanjay
Chaudhary has filed his affidavit in token of the confirmation regarding compounding. r
2011:DHC:19847
G)
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 provides that irrespective of anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, every offence punishable under the Act is compoundable. Since the parties have amicably resolved the matter and compounded the offence, revision petition is accepted and the impugned order of conviction passed by learned M.M. dated 19.01.2011 and the order of appellate court dated
19.05.2011 are set aside and the revisionist is acquitted of the charge in view of the compounding of the offence.
The revisionist is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Petition as well as the application stand disposed of.
~
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
AUGUST 02, 2011 pst
JUDGE
-:-~
;
2011:DHC:19847
JUDGMENT