- (1.) This Criminal Revision Application has been directed against the order dated 20.08.2014, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Cr. Appeal No.175 of 2008, whereby he dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of conviction and sentence dated 27.06.2008, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No.807 of 2002 whereby the petitioner was found guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo S.I for six months.
(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution's case is that Trilok Nath Pandit the complainant/ O.P. No.2, who was the power of attorney holder on behalf of Devendra Pal Singh one of the partner of Surendra Construction, which deals in the transport business of supplying pay loader, etc., had supplied pay loaders and dumpers to the petitioner, P. K. Kaul between year 1999-2000 for which the total sum of Rs. 4,13,000/- was due; that the petitioner, in order to discharge his liability, issued a cheque bearing No.655455 dated 08.03.2002 for Rs. 4,13,000/- drawn on S.B.I., Dhanbad, but when the said cheque was presented before the Bank for encasement by the complainant /O.P. No.2, the said cheque was dishonoured by the Bank due to "Insufficient Fund" in the account of the drawer, whereafter O.P. No.2 sent a legal notice on 23.03.2002 to the petitioner which was returned un-served thereafter O.P. No.2 spoke to the petitioner, who asked O.P. No.2 to present the cheque again as he had deposited the money in his account; that on 09.05.2002 the cheque was again presented for encasement but it could not be honoured as the petitioner had stopped the payment of cheque; that on 22.05.2002 again a legal notice was given to the petitioner but he neither replied nor made payment and subsequently a Complaint Case was filed, due to non-payment of the cheque amount by the petitioner. After enquiry, cognisance was taken under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the case was transferred to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad. The Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad on the basis of the evidence and material available on record, found the petitioner guilty for the offence under Section 138 of N.I Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment (R.I) for one year and also ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six, whereafter the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was dismissed by the order impugned in this revision.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that good sense has prevailed between the parties and they have settled their disputes outside the court. Both the parties have filed a joint compromise petition, being I.A No.6554/2014, stating that the petitioner has paid Rs. 2,14,000/- to the complainant/O.P. No.2 as full and final settlement of his claim and the same has been acknowledged by O.P. No.2. The complainant/ O.P. No.2 does not have any grievance, now, against the petitioner. It has been submitted that the order dated 20.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Cr. Appeal No.175 of 2008 and 27.06.2008, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No.807 of 2002 may be quashed in view of the fact that the parties have willingly compromised the case outside the court. It has also been submitted that since the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is compoundable in nature and considering the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, the offence be allowed to be compounded.;