IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. R. No.1159 of 2010 Date of Decision:30.7.2010 Rajiv Kumar .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. N.S. Sodhi, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 12.4.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar dated 4.7.2009 whereby the petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and was sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-. Subsequently, during the pendency of the revision petition, a compromise has been effected between the petitioner and the complainant. As per the compromise, the petitioner is ready to pay the amount towards the dishonoured cheque alongwith inerest. The said offer is accepted by the complainant. In this regard, the petitioner has paid the entire amount towards the dishonoured cheque alongwith interest to the respondent- complainat in the Court. Consequently, the complainant has made a separate statement before this Court today stating that the matter has been compromised and he has received the entire amount towards dishonoured cheque alongwith interest @ 7% and he has no objection if the petitioner is acquitted of the charge and the revision is accordingly allowed. Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is reproduced as Crl. R. No.1159 of 2010 -2- under: “147. Offence to be compoundable.- Nothwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), very offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.” This Court in the case of Ritesh Gupta v. State of Punjab and another 2009(3) R.C.R (Criminal) 61 while relying upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of O.P Dholakia v. State of Haryana and another, (2000) 1 SCC 762 wherein the Apex Court was pleased to allow the accused and the complainant to compound an offence under Section 138 of the Act despite conviction and sentence having been held by three Forums, the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Act was annulled. Accordingly, in view of the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, affidavit of the complainant, the parties are allowed to compound the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court vide judgment and order dated 4.7.2009 which was confirmed by the lower Appellate Court vide judgment dated 12.4.2010 is set aside and the petitioner is accordingly acquitted of the aforesaid charge. The fine of Rs.5,000/- deposited by the petitioner in pursuance to his conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court be released to respondent No.2-complainant forthwith Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 30.7.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE