Rahul Jain v. Rajat Chadha

1. This a revision petition filed by the petitioner. It has been stated by the petitioner that during the pendency of the petition respondent N0.2/complainant has settled the matter with the petitioner and, therefore, the conviction and sentence which has been imposed upon the petitioner be set aside.

2. Briefly stating the facts of the case are that the petitioner was convicted by the learned ACMM, North-East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi for having committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act vide order dated 19.01.2011. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year apart from payment of fine of Rs.

4 Lacs. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was to further undergo S.I. for six months. Fine was directed to be recoverable as the arrears of land revenue.

3. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned 2011:DHC:1980[5] ASJ but the same was dismissed by the learned ASJ vide order dated v—/ 12.05.2011. The petitioner, still feeling aggrieved, has preferred the present petition and along with the petition, he has also filed an affidavit of the complainant, Sh. Rajat Sharma wherein the complainant has stated that the petitioner has amicably settled the matter with him and that he has received a draft for a sum of Rs. 2 lacs towards full and final settlement of his entire claim from Mr. Rahul Jain, the petitioner. He has further stated that he has no other claim due or payable from the petitioner and accordingly, submits that the matter may be treated as settled.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Saved Babalal HAIR 2010 SC 1907 whereby the Apex Court in the case of conviction and sentence for an offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has permitted the Courts to allow compounding in terms of Section 147 of the N.I. Act. In all such cases where compounding permission is granted after conviction and the sentencing, guidelines have been issued for compounding at the stage of revision or appeal. It has been observed tht in case compounding is done, at the stage of revision or appeal then the accused be directed to pay 15% of the cheque amount as compensation. Further, the compounding of the offence has the result of acquittal of the accused. In the instant case also, as the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been compounded and affidavit of the complainant is on record. it would result in setting aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned ACMM on 19.01.2011 which has been upheld by learned ASJ vide order dated 12.05.2011. Therefore, in view of the compounding of the offence by the complainant, the present petitioner stands acquitted. However, this shall be subject to the petitioner depositing 15% of the cheque amount of Rs.2.60 lacs which comes to Rs.39,000/- as claimed by the petitioner by way of costs with the learned Trial Court.

5. On deposit of the aforesaid amount, of Rs. 39,000/- by the petitioner, he shall be released, if not involved in any other case.

6. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of.

7. Dasti. V.K. SHALI,J JUNE 03, 2011 anb