NARESH KUMAR Vs. OM PRAKASH RAKTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Looking to the nature of order, I propose to pass, it is not at all necessary to delve into the facts in detail. Suffice it to state that the complainant/respondent instituted a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'Act') against the petitioner on the allegations that a cheque of Rs.2,00,000.00 handed over by the petitioner to respondent in order to discharge his liability had been dishonoured. The complaint was decided in favour of the respondent by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Theog, District Shimla, H.P. and the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and also directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,50,000.00 to the complainant/respondent.

(2.) Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Magistrate on 28/29/1/2013 though the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (CBI), Shimla, however, the same came to be dismissed vide judgment dtd. 5/12/2017, constraining the petitioner to file the instant revision petition.

(3.) Today, both the parties are present and identified as such by their respective counsel(s). Learned counsel for the petitioner states that rt the petitioner has paid the entire compensation amount to the respondent which statement has not been denied by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner requested that the case be compounded.