BADRUDDIN ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The solitary question, which falls for consideration in the instant revision application, is as to whether even after affirmation of judgment of conviction of the petitioner under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and order of sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year by the appellate court, the petitioner can be allowed to compound the offence under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code")?

(2.) The details of the facts is not required to be reproduced herein rather a brief statement would suffice the matter:- At the instance of the complainant Raju Verma, C.P. Case no. 1478 of 2007 was instituted under Section 417 of I.P.C. on the allegation that on 10.02.2007 the petitioner, who was an employee of B.C.C.L, approached him to get the name of the complainant registered for contractor in Bharat Coking Coal Limited merely on payment of Rs.12,000/- and on his assurance, the complainant paid Rs. 12,000/- to the petitioner but he failed to get his name registered. Thereafter, the complainant asked the accused-petitioner for refund of his money but the accused-petitioner in place of returning the said money, advised him to invest Rs.9,000/- in the work with another co-accused. After the work was over, the complainant repeatedly demanded his money. Thereafter, the accused-petitioner handed over him a cheuqe of Rs.20,000/- but on presentation in bank, the cheque was dishonoured due to insufficiency of fund.

(3.) It appears from the record that the court of Judicial Magistrate after examining the complainant and other witnesses took cognizance of the offence. After framing of charge, the witnesses were examined and finally the court of learned Judicial Magistrate convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 417 of the I.P.C. as indicated above. On an appeal filed by the petitioner, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence was affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Dhanbad where after the petitioner preferred this revision.