HEM RAJ Vs. NITIN KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Looking to the nature of order, I propose to pass, it is not at all necessary to deal with the facts in detail. Suffice it to state that the complainant/respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'Act') which after trial was allowed by the trial Magistrate and the petitioner was ordered to be convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay compensation in the sum of '6, 50, 000/- to the complainant/respondent. The petitioner filed an appeal assailing the aforesaid conviction and sentence and the same was upheld by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P.

(2.) Mr.H.S.Rangra, Advocate, states that his client has already prepared a bank draft of '5, 50, 000/- in the name of the Registrar General, H.P. High Court, Shimla and he may be permitted to deposit the same in the Registry of this Court. Permission granted. Registry is directed to accept the amount of '5, 50, 000/- as deposited by the petitioner. He further represents that an amount of '1, 00, 000/- has also been deposited by the petitioner before the learned trial Court.

(3.) Since the petitioner has deposited the entire compensation amount, learned counsel for the complainant/respondent states that his client is no more interested to pursue this complaint against the petitioner. The amount deposited by the petitioner be released in favour of complainant/respondent as per procedure.