RAMESHCHANDRA POONAMCHAND RANA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Application has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Nadiad in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 2006 confirming the order dated 15. 4. 2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor (Thasr Camp) in Criminal Case No. 725 of 2002 by which the present revisionist was convicted for offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for 1 year and further fined Rs. 5000/ -. RULE.

(2.) IT is submitted by Mr Nirav Thakkar, learned Advocate for the applicant that the matter is settled between the complainant and the accused. The complainant is present in the court. He has been identified by learned Advocate Mr B P Purohit. Mr Purohit has submitted that he will file his Vakalatnama during the course of the day. Copy of the receipt of the amount which is received by the complainant produced by the learned Advocate is ordered to be taken on record. It is submitted by Mr Purohit that the complainant has no grievance and the matter is amicably settled between the parties.

(3.) IN view of the above, Mr Thakkar, learned Advocate for the applicant seeks permission to compound the offence under section 147of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In support of his case, Mr Thakkar has placed reliance on a decision in the case of Vinay Devanna Nayak v. Ryot Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. (2007 (0) GLHEL-SC 40168.