UDAYSINH VIRBHADRASINH SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for the respondent ' State and learned advocate Mr.B.M.Mangukiya waives service of rule for respondent No.2 ' original complainant.

(2.) The revision has been filed challenging the concurrent findings arrived at by the Court below whereby in Criminal Case No.1531 of 2011, the learned Trial Court has convicted the revisionist for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and also passed the order of compensation equal to the amount of the cheque, failing which simple imprisonment of further one month has been awarded. The revisionist unsuccessfully assailed the said judgment and order in Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2015 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh confirmed the judgment and order. Hence revision.

(3.) When the revision is called out for hearing, the complainant along with his learned advocate Mr.Mangukiya is present. Both the parties as well as their learned advocates submit that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and amount of cheque has been received by the first informant. In support of their statement, an affidavit of respondent No.2 is also produced which is taken on record. Sec. 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act permits compounding of offence at any stage of the hearing. Therefore, compounding of the offence is also permitted at the stage of the present revision.