LAWS(MPH)-2015-1-127

RAMANAND MISHRA Vs. PRADYUMN SINGH

Decided On January 28, 2015
Ramanand Mishra Appellant
V/S
Pradyumn Singh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant has preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 read with 401 of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 23.1.2008 passed by the Court of Fifth Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Rewa in Criminal Appeal No. 421/2006, Ramanand Mishra v. Pradyumn Singh, confirming the judgment dated 12.12.2006 passed by the Special Court of JMFC, Rewa in Criminal Case No. 5895/2006, Pradyumn Singh v. Ramanand, whereby the applicant stands convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short the Act) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- and in default of which to further undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. Having analyzed the evidence on record, both the Courts below found proved that the applicant had purchased tractor parts worth Rs. 52,358/- from the respondent's tractor shop at Rewa. The applicant paid the aforesaid amount by 5 cheques, of these cheques two cheques each Rs. 10,000/- had been dishonoured by the drawee Bank due to insufficient funds in the Bank account of the applicant.

(2.) Vide order dated 4.2.2008, this Court had suspended the execution of jail sentence awarded to the applicant till the final disposal of the revision. Considering the nature of the lis between the parties, vide order dated 22.7.2014 this Court referred the matter for mediation for amicable settlement of the dispute. As per the report of the Mediator dated 16.12.2014, the respondent agreed to settle the dispute for all intents and purposes on getting payment of Rs. 15,000/- from the applicant. Further according to report, the applicant paid the aforesaid amount in cash to the respondent at the time of mediation process itself. The Mediator in his report recommends the closure of the revision.

(3.) On 5.1.2015, the learned Counsel for the parties stated at the bar that the case be settled as per the report of the Mediator.