CHITTARANJAN MAITY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, as also learned counsel for the complainant-opposite party No.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 18.4.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, in Cr. Appeal No. 65 of 2011, whereby the appeal filed against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 1.4.2011 passed by Sri Taufique Ahmed, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur, in C/1 Case No. 3030 of 2009/T.R. No. 1512 of 2011, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court below. I.A. No. 5498 of 2013 has been filed stating that the case has since been compromised between the parties, and for exemption from filing the surrender certificate. It is stated in the interlocutory application that both the parties have settled the dispute outside the Court and the complainant received the money due from the petitioner and as such, the complainant has no objection in compounding the offence. The affidavit has been sworn by the complainant accepting the compromise. The complainant is also present in this Court and he accepts the compromise between the parties. In view of the compromise between the parties and in view of the fact that the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable in nature, I am inclined to accept the compromise between the parties and allow the offence to be compounded. Accordingly, the impugned Judgment and Order dated 1.4.2011 passed by Sri Taufique Ahmed, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur, in C/1 Case No. 3030 of 2009/T.R. No. 1512 of 2011, as also the Judgment dated 18.4.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamshedur, in Cr. Appeal No. 65 of 2011, are hereby, set aside on the basis of the compounding of the offence. Consequently, the petitioner is acquitted of the accusation. The petitioner is on bail and he is discharged from the liabilities of his bail bond. This revision application, as well as the aforesaid interlocutory application, are accordingly, allowed.