NAWAB SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment dated February 19th, 2003 passed by Sessions Judge, Jalandhar upholding the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated February 6th, 2002 of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalandhar, whereby, petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (for short 'N.I. Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 11 months and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- with default stipulation.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has urged that parties have compromised the matter and the petitioner has paid the cheque amount to the complainant. He has also placed on record affidavit (Annexure P-l) and the certificate (Annexure P-2) given by the complainant to this effect. This fact has also been mentioned in the order dated April 10th, 2003 passed by this Court. In Vinay Deuanna Nayak Vs. Ryot Seua Sahakari Bank Limited' 2008 (1) Criminal Revision No. 406 of 2003. 2 RCR (Criminal) 249, Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the compromise entered between the parties in view of Section 147 of N.I. Act and the primary object underlying Section 138 and acquitted the accused/ appellant. Since the matter has been settled between the parties and in view of provisions of Section 147 of N.I. Act and law laid down in the aforesaid authority, the revisionist is entitled to acquittal. Resultantly, the revision is accepted and the orders of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below are set-aside and he is acquitted.;