HARI KRISHAN Vs. RATTAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has suffered conviction and sentence from two Courts and is now in revision. The learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.1 have jointly stated that the matter has been amicably settled by the petitioner and respondent No.1 outside the Court. The petitioner and respondent No.1 have filed joint application Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? yes under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'Act') for compounding the offence, the application is signed by petitioner and respondent No.1. The application is supported by the affidavit of petitioner as well as affidavit of respondent No.1. A compromise dated 11.6.2012 duly signed by the petitioner, respondent No.1 and the witnesses has also been placed on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.1 have stated that the application has also been signed by them.

(2.) IT has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.1 that parties without any coercion have voluntarily settled the dispute outside the Court. The petitioner has paid the entire amount of compensation Rs. 1,00,000/- to respondent No. 1. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 has stated that respondent No.1 has received Rs. 1,00,000/- compensation outside the Court. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 has stated that he has instructions to state that respondent No.1 has no objection in case the application and revision are allowed, conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No.2, Sundernagar on 25.8.2009 in Cr. Complaint No. 115-I/2007 and affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi on 18.6.2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2009 are set-aside and petitioner is acquitted of the accusation under Section 138 of the Act.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that petitioner has deposited 15% of the cheque amount in the registry of this Court. The said amount be remitted to H.P.High Court Legal Services Committee account in terms of Damodar S.Prabhu versus Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663. The revision as well as application is disposed of on above terms, so also the pending application(s) if any.