HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Misc. Application no. 264/2008 Misc. Application no. 295/2008 Stay application no. 1/2002 Misc. Application no. 233/2008 Misc. Application no. 244/2008 IN Crl. Revision No. 21 of 2008 Ashok Kumar Malhotra. ----Applicant/Revisionist. Versus State of Uttarakhand and another. ------- Respondents Ms. Anjali Nauliyal, holding brief of Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Harish Pujari, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Lalit Miglani, Adv. holding brief of Sri Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Dated: 6th May 2008 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. This revision u/s 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.) has been directed against judgment and order dated 23.04.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Criminal Complaint Case no. 998/2005 Jagdish Prasad Chauhan vs. Ashok Kumar Malhotra whereby the revisionist was convicted u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced with fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default of payment of fine one month’s simple imprisonment was awarded. The Court below while compensating the complainant u/s 357 Cr.P.C., directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 4,00,000/- to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation the revisionist shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months’. The revisionist has further challenged the order dated 20.11.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Haridwar in criminal appeal no. 37/2007 Ashok Kumar Malhotra vs. State of Uttarakhand and another by which the learned Sessions Judge affirmed the judgment and order dated 23.04.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. Brief facts, giving rise to the present revision, are that the complainant/respondent no.2 Jagdish Prasad Chauhan filed complaint case no. 998/2005 u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act against the revisionist Ashok Kumar Malhotra with the averments, inter-alia that the revisionist had taken a sum of Rs. 3,70,000/- as loan from the complainant for which he issued a cheque which was dishonoured from the concerned Bank. Besides giving notice, he did not pay the amount of loan. The revisionist was summoned by the Trial Court and he remain present in the Court. The Trial Court recorded the evidence of the complainant and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Trial Court vide her judgment and order dated 23.04.2007 passed the order as above. The revisionist preferred criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 23.04.2007 and the learned Sessions Judge vide his judgment and order dated 20.11.2007 affirmed the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved with both these orders, the revisionist has come up in the instant revision. Heard Ms. Anjali Nauliyal, holding brief of Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State and Sri Lalit Maglani, holding brief of Sri Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned counsel for the respondent no.2 have submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise as prescribed u/s 147 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, therefore the revision may be disposed of in terms of the compromise. The complainant Sri Jagdish Prasad Chauhan has filed an affidavit stating therein that he has received a draft no. 770688 dated 12.04.2008 drawn in his favour towards the part payment and the rest of the amount has been paid in cash (total Rs. 3,70,000/-) in complete satisfaction of the cheque in question. Learned counsel for the parties has prayed that the revision may be decided in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties on 20.04.2008 and the impugned judgment and orders dated 23.04.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar and 20.11.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Haridwar may be set-aside. As per Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable. Accordingly, the compromise filed by complainant, Sri Jagdish Prasad Chauhan who is identified through his counsel and that of the revisionist Ashok Kumar Malhotra, whose signatures have been attested by the Jailor, District Jail, Haridwar, is accepted. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist Ashok Kumar is confined in jail and as the parties have entered into a compromise, therefore the accused/ revisionist may be released from jail. Accordingly, the revision is disposed of in terms of the compromise filed by the parties. The impugned judgment and order dated 23.04.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar and that of dated 20.11.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Haridwar both are hereby set-aside. (All the pending applications stand disposed of accordingly) Let the accused/revisionist Ashok Kumar Malhotra be released from jail forthwith, if he is not wanted in some other case. A copy of this judgment be sent to the Court concerned for making its compliance. (Dharam Veer, J.) NCM: