- (1.) The present revision application is in respect of the litigation involving the offence enumerated by Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
(2.) Heard Mr. P.P.N. Ray, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Jyoti Prasad Sinha, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 as well as the learned counsel representing the State.
(3.) It is not necessary to delve into the facts leading up to the institution of proceedings before this Court; as the petitioner and opposite party no.2 have settled their dispute and have filed a joint compromise petition before this Court with a prayer to compound the offence as contemplated under Section 147 of the Act. However, a brief statement of facts is necessary for the proper appreciation. At the instance of present complainant-opposite party no.2- Vishwanath Mahato, a complaint petition was filed on the allegation that the present petitioner issued two cheques for sum of rupees one lakh each in favour of opposite party no.2 being the proprietor of Rajdhani Traders in order to discharge the legal enforceable liability but when the two cheques were presented in Bank, the same bank returned both the cheques along with a returned memo on the ground of insufficient funds in the account. Thereafter, information was given to the petitioner but he preferred not to respond whereafter legal notice was also sent followed by a demand notice but finding no way as the petitioner failed to discharge his liability, this case was filed.;