GIRDHARI LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dtd. 7/6/2017, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hoshiarpur in complaint bearing No. 581 dtd. 4/11/2014 titled as Satish Kumar Malhotra Vs. Gulshan Lal Dhawan, filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (For short, NI Act'), whereby the petitioner was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under the aforesaid Sec. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two yeas and to pay compensation to the complainant/respondent No.2 to the tune of cheque amount i.e. Rs.7,50,000.00 within a period of two months of expiry of period prescribed for appeal. The petitioner has also laid challenge to the judgment dtd. 29/1/2025, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby the appeal of the petitioner had been dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the petitioner/accused was running a business of goldsmith under the name and style of Gulshan Jewelers'. He had obtained loan of Rs.7,50,000.00 from respondent No.2. The petitioner in order to discharge his legally enforceable debt, had issued a cheque for Rs.7,50,000.00. However, on presentation of the said cheque by the complainant before its banker, the same was dishonoured with the remarks funds insufficient'. The petitioner was served with a legal notice on 30/9/2014 but he failed to make payment within the time stipulated. Aggrieved with the same, respondent No.2 filed the aforesaid complaint under Sec. 138 of NI Act, in which, the petitioner held guilty and sentenced as mentioned above. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by learned Appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition. During the pendency of this petition, the sentence of the petitioner was suspended vide order dtd. 28/2/2025 and since then, he is on bail.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2/complainant. In pursuance of the said settlement, the entire disputed amount has been given by the petitioner to the complainant. It is submitted that the complainant also admits the factum of the above stated settlement having been arrived between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, he deserves to be granted permission to compound the offence.