JASPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision petition under section 397/401 Crimial P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.4.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar (for short 'the appellant court' hereinafter) whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3.10.2002 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter), was dismissed.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) During the pendency of the revision petition, respondent No. 2 complainant Harish Chandra and the petitioner appeared before this Court and filed a compromise compounding the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) stating therein that the respondent No. 2 filed a complaint under section 138 of the Act against the petitioner for dishonour of cheque dated 24.7.2000 for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000.00. The parties have compromised the matter and there remains no grievance including the payment of cheque amount and, therefore, compounded the offence by filing the compromise and the compromise has been verified by the Registrar Administration of Rajasthan High Court, at Jodhpur. The parties have been identified by their respective counsel. The offence punishable under section 138 of the Act is compoundable under section 147 of the Act, which provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable. The effect of compounding the offence as provided under section (8) of the section 320 of the Crimial P.C. is that the composition of an offence under this section shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded. Sub-section (6) of Sec. 320 of the Code provides that a High Court or Court of Session acting in the exercise of its powers of revision under Sec. 401 may allow any person to compound any offence which such person is competent to compound under this Section. In the instant case, the respondent No. 2 complainant is competent to compound the offence and, therefore, he is permitted to compound the offence. He has compounded the offence by filing the compromise and the compromise is accepted.