IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL REVISION NO.72 OF 2006 Vijay Kumar S/o Shri Sukh Ram R/o Gali No.1, Indra Colony, Rudrapur P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar ……… Revisionist Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Rajendra Arora S/o Shri Kisan Lal Arora R/o House No.50, 51, Hari Mandir Gali, Rudrapur P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar ……Respondents Dated: February 10, 2009 Sri S.K. Mandal and Sri Vipul Sharma, Advocates for the revisionist Sri M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State Sri J.S. Virk, Advocate for respondent no.2 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This criminal revision, preferred under Section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.04.2006 passed by Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, Rudrapur in Criminal Appeal No.7/2005, Vijay Kumar Vs. Rajendra Arora & another, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal of the revisionist and has confirmed the judgment and order dated 14.03.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur in Criminal Case No.117/2005, Rajendra Arora Vs. Vijay Kumar, whereby the revisionist was convicted u/s 138 of the N.I. Act and was sentenced to undergo one year R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.24,000/- as compensation. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Learned counsel for both the parties have filed compromise application supported by the respective affidavits and have submitted that both the parties, namely, Vijay Kumar (revisionist) and Rajendra Arora (respondent no.2) have entered into a compromise and have agreed that the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, registered as criminal case no.117/2005 at P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, be compounded. It is further submitted that respondent no.2 has received a sum of Rs.37,000/- towards the cheque which was dishonored and the revisionist is also agreed to give an extra sum of Rs.14,000/- as compensation. Learned counsel for both the parties prayed that the revision may be decided in terms of the compromise arrived at in between the parties. 4. After considering all the facts and peculiar circumstances of the case, it is expedient in the interest of justice to decide the case in terms of the compromise arrived at in between the parties. The compromise application filed on behalf of the revisionist as well as respondent no.2 is accepted. 5. In these circumstances, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the judgment and order dated 18.04.2006 passed by Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, Rudrapur in Criminal Appeal No.7/2005 as well as the judgment and order dated 14.03.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur in Criminal Case No.117/2005, are hereby set aside. The revision is disposed of accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 10.02.2009 RG