IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Miscellaneous Application No. 1208 of 2009 In CRIMINAL REVISION No. 154 of 2005 Devdutta Sharma .…. Revisionist Versus State of Uttaranchal & Anr. ……… Respondents November 11, 2009 Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the revisionist. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no. 1. Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate for the respondents no. 2. HON’BLE DHARAM VEER, J. This criminal revision preferred under Section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against the judgment and order dated 5.8.2005 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2004, whereby learned District & Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal of revisionist against the judgment and order dated 8.7.2004 of Special Judicial Magistrate (I), Haridwar whereby the revisionist Devdutta Sharma was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, the Act) and was sentenced to six months’ simple imprisonment and was also directed to pay compensation of rupees three lakhs to respondent no. 2 Ravi Dutt Dhiman and in default, to undergo further two months’ simple imprisonment. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers available on record. 3. A miscellaneous application no. 1208 of 2009 has been filed jointly on behalf of the petitioner and respondent no. 2, wherein has been stated that both the parties have reached to an amicable settlement and the entire amount of cheque 2 has been paid by the revisionist to the complainant/respondent no. 2 on 8.11.2009 and now nothing is due to him and the entire dispute between both the parties now stood resolved being settled. It has been further prayed that both the parties to the dispute wish that the matter be compounded and the conviction and sentence awarded to the revisionist by the impugned judgment and order be set aside. Miscellaneous application is duly supported by the affidavits of both the parties. In para 3 of the affidavit filed on behalf of the complainant/respondent no. 2 Mr. Ravi Dutt Dhiman, it has been stated that he has received the entire amount of cheque from the revisionist and nothing remains due now. 4. Section 147 of the Act provides that “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable. As such, the miscellaneous application deserves to be allowed as the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. 5. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The conviction of the revisionist/accused under Section 138 of the Act by the judgment and order dated 8.7.2004 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate (I), Haridwar and affirmed by the District & Sessions Judge, Haridwar vide judgment and order dated 5.8.2005 in Criminal Appeal No. 29/2004 is hereby set aside. Sentence of 6 months’ simple imprisonment and compensation of rupees three lakhs, in default, further two months’ simple imprisonment awarded to the revisionist is also quashed. Revisionist is on bail. He need not surrender unless wanted in any another case. His bail bonds are cancelled. Sureties are discharged. 6. Revision stands disposed of accordingly. 3 7. Amount of Rs. 75,000/- deposited by the revisionist in the registry of this High Court in compliance of the order dated 10.8.2005 shall be refunded to him. Lower court record be sent back. (Dharam Veer, J.) 11.11.2009 PRABODH