RAJU CHAUDHARY Vs. SANJEEV KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present revision petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the judgment dated 6.8.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Mandi, camp at Karsog, District Mandi in Criminal Appeal No. 48/2013 whereby he affirmed the judgment dated 30.3.2013/26.8.2013 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P., in a Complaint Case No. 43-II of 2010, filed by the complainant/respondent No. 1 against the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') whereby the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay compensation of Rs.1,70,000.00 to the complainant.

(2.) Today, the petitioner is present in the Court and he has paid a sum of Rs. 1,20,000.00 in the open Court to learned counsel for the respondent No.1/complainant. It is represented by learned counsel for the respondent No.1/complainant that he has received a sum of Rs.1,20,000.00 on behalf of the complainant. He further stated that the complainant/respondent No. 1 does not want to pursue the case any further against the petitioner.

(3.) From the records of the case, I find that this is not a case wherein the offence for which the petitioner has been charged can 'stricto sensu' be termed to be an offence against the State. Therefore, this is a case where the continuation of criminal case against the petitioner would put the petitioner to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not setting aside the impugned judgments of conviction and sentence.