(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 one year and to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-.The petitioner filed an appeal assailing the aforesaid conviction and sentence and the same was upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., Camp at Karsog. It is thereafter that the petitioner has filed the instant revision petition assailing the judgments of conviction and sentence as passed by the learned Courts below.
(2.) Today, petitioner and an official from the respondentBank are present in the Court and identified as such by their respective counsel(s). It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has paid the entire compensation amount to the respondent-Bank. Moreover, as per separate statement of Shri Jugal Kishor Chanyal, an official from the respondent-Bank, recorded today and placed on the file, he has stated that he has been authorized by the Bank to appear today in the Court and as per his instructions, the Bank has objection to the case being closed provided the amount of Rs. 50,000/- lying deposited in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karsog, District Mandi, is directed to be released in favour of the Bank along with up-to-date interest. The aforesaid amount lying deposited in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karsog, District Mandi, is ordered to be released in favour of the Bank, along with up-to-date interest, as per procedure.
(3.) From the records of the case, I find that this is not a case wherein the offence for which the petitioner has been charged can 'stricto sensu' be termed to be an offence against the State.