Crl. Revision No. 1551 of 2008 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1551 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 10, 2010 Vijay Shankar ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ........Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. R.S. Bains, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Brijeshwar Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. SABINA, J. Ramesh Kumar-complainant had filed the complaint against the petitioner Vijay Shankar under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bathinda vide judgment dated 11.11.2006 convicted the petitioner Vijay Shanker under Section 138 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bathinda vide judgment dated 11.07.2008. Hence, the present revision petition. The facts of the case as noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in para 2 of its judgment reads as under :- Crl. Revision No. 1551 of 2008 (O&M) 2 “The accused took a loan of Rs.1,95,000/- i.e. Rs. one lac on 19.3.2002, Rs.65,000/- on 25.3.2002 and Rs.30,000/- on 14.5.2002 from the complainant and agreed to pay the interest thereon @ 24% per annum, till the payment of loan. In partial discharge of his liability, the accused issued a cheque of Rs. one lac whose No. was 80800 dated 4.7.2002 from his account no.12901, drawn on Bank of Baroda, Bathinda, in favour of the complainant. But the cheque was returnred dishonoured and unpaid with the remark 'insufficient funds', vide memo 19.8.2002 of Bank of Baroda when it was presented for encashment by the complainant with hi bank i.e. State Bank of India, Bathinda on 19.8.2002. It is further alleged that the accused willfully evaded the service of the notice when the complainant issued him through counsel dated 22.8.2002 by registered post calling him to pay the amount within a period of 15 days from the receipt of notice. The Postman visited the accused several times. It is further alleged that the accused had committed the default in the payment of the amount of cheque and thereby accused committed an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.” Learned Counsel for the parties have submitted that now, during the pendency of this revision petition, parties have arrived at a compromise. The copy of the compromise has been placed on record as Annexure P-10/T. A perusal of the compromise, which is duly signed by the parties Crl. Revision No. 1551 of 2008 (O&M) 3 and has been attested by the witnesses, reveals that comlainant-respondent no.2 Ramesh Kumar has admitted the execution of the compromise between the parties. It also reveals that complainant-respondent no.2 Ramesh Kumar has received the amount in question through cheque and now nothing remains due between the parties. Ramesh Kumar comlainant-respondent no.2 is present in Court along with his Counsel and has submitted that the matter in dispute has since been compromised and he has no objection if the petitioner is acquitted in this case. As per Section 147 of the Act, every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable. Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and now the respondent no.2 has received the entire amount in dispute, it would be just and expedient to allow the petition. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The impugned judgments of the courts below are set aside. Consequently, the petitioner is acquitted of the charge framed against him. Fine deposited by the petitioner be treated as costs of proceedings. (SABINA) March 10, 2010 JUDGE Anand