Criminal Revision No. 1428 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No. 1428 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.10.2009 Shameshwar Singh ..... Petitioner vs Vinod Kohli ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. A. S. Manaise, Advocate, for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. The petitioner has filed the present revision before this Court challenging his conviction by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurdaspur, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act,1881, which was upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court, Gurdaspur. The petitioner has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a compensation of Rs. 80,000/-. While issuing notice of motion on 27.5.2009, this court passed the following order:- “Notice of motion for July 10, 2009. Meanwhile, an interim direction is issued that in case a sum of Rs. 80,000/- is deposited on behalf of the petitioner and an application is moved for bail, the petitioner will be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurdaspur.” As is mentioned in order dated 2.6.2009 passed by the learned court below, the petitioner deposited Rs. 80,000/-. On 3.8.2009 this court passed the following order:- “Learned counsel for the respondent submits that there are chances of compromise between the parties. He further submits that in terms of order dated 27.5.2009 issuing notice of motion, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 80,000/- with the learned court below. As the respondent is entitled to receive that amount, considering the fact that the cheque issued by the Criminal Revision No. 1428 of 2009 2 petitioner to the respondent to discharge his liability had bounced, the amount be directed to be released to him. As the petitioner has been convicted by both the courts below finding that he had issued a cheque for discharge of his liability, which was dishonoured, let the amount lying deposited with the learned court below be released to the respondent on his furnishing security to the satisfaction of the court below.” Today, learned counsel for the parties submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled. The petitioner has placed on record the affidavit of the respondent to the effect that the matter in dispute has been compromised between the parties and he will withdraw Rs. 80,000/- lying deposited in the court below as per the order dated 27.5.2009 of this court. He has also stated that he has no objection in case the conviction of the petitioner is set aside. Once the parties have settled their dispute, in terms of the Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Vinay Devanna Nayak v. Ryot Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd., 2007(5) Law Herald (SC) 3843, the offence committed by the petitioner, for which he has been convicted, is compoundable. Accordingly, it is directed that the order of conviction and sentence awarded by the Courts below in the case of the petitioner is set aside and he is acquitted from all the charges levelled against him. The petition is disposed of. 27.10.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge