SHAITAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matters in Court.

(2.) It is stated at the Bar that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties after the judgment dtd. 5/12/2020 passed by the appellate court whereby the judgment dtd. 29/11/2017 passed by the trial court has been affirmed. It is borne out that the complainant is not inclined to proceed further in the matter. Learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in case of Damodar S. Prabhu vs Sayed Babalal H [2010(5) SCC 66].

(3.) Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled the dispute and complainant respondent No.2 Ravindra Garg had accepted the sum towards full and final settlement of the cheque, on the satisfaction of the complainant and in the light of provisions of Sec. 147 of NI Act and in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. (supra), the sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under Sec. 138 NI Act is liable to be set aside. However, since the compromise has been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, a cost of 15% of the cheque amount deserves to be imposed upon the petitioner in the light of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (Supra).