ABDUL QUDDUS ALIAS ABDUL KUDUSH @ ABDUL KUDUSH ANSARI S/O MD. BELAL ANSARI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking the Revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code'), prayer has been made to set aside the judgment dated 04.07.2015 passed by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-7th, Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 115 of 2014 whereby and where under while affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, the petitioner has been directed pay Rs.2,50,000.00 to the complainant-opposite party no.2.

(2.) Heard the, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned counsel representing the State.

(3.) It is not necessary to delve into the facts leading to the institution of proceedings, as the petitioner and opposite party no.2 have settled their dispute and have filed a joint compromise petition before this Court with a prayer to compound the offence as contemplated under Sec. 147 of the Act. However, a brief statement of facts is necessary for the proper appreciation: At the instance of present complainant-opposite party no.2- Pawan Kumar, a Complaint Case no. 1432 of 2012 was filed against the present petitioner under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (in short the Act ) with the allegation that the accused-petitioner purchased poultry feed chicks, medicine and other materials from the shop of complainant and made payment by issuance of cheque of Rs.1,50,000 of Canara Bank in favour of Shushila Enterprises, but when the said cheque was presented for encashment in bank, it stood dishonoured due to insufficient fund . The complaint sent a legal notice to the accused-petitioner in consonance with the provisions of the Act. Thereafter following the other formalities, the present complaint was filed when the accused-petitioner failed to pay the said amount. It appears from the record that the trial court after examination of the witnesses and considering the allegation and evidences on record, convicted the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and also directed the accused petitioner to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000.00.