IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No. 425 of 2015 CRLREV No. 426 of 2015 CRLREV No. 427 of 2015 CRLREV No. 425 of 2015 Pramod Sah …. Petitioner(s) Mr. B.B. Routray, Advocate -versus- Ramdev Agarwal …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. P.S. Nayak, Advocate CRLREV No. 426 of 2015 Pramod Sah …. Petitioner(s) Mr. B.B. Routray, Advocate -versus- Ramdev Agarwal …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. P.S. Nayak, Advocate CRLREV No. 427 of 2015 Pramod Sah …. Petitioner(s) Mr. B.B. Routray, Advocate -versus- Ramdev Agarwal …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. P.S. Nayak, Advocate CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 14.07.2026 25. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Criminal Revision No. 425 of 2015 is arising out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.05.2014 passed by the learned JMFC, Rourkela in 1CC Case No. 538 of 2012, which has been confirmed in appeal by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela vide order dated 05.02.2015 in Criminal Appeal No.12 of 2014. Criminal Revision No. 426 of 2015 is arising out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.05.2014 passed by the learned JMFC, Rourkela in 1CC Case No. 540 of 2012, which has been confirmed in appeal by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela vide order dated 05.02.2015 in Criminal Appeal No.14 of 2014. Criminal Revision No. 427 of 2015 is arising out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.05.2014 passed by the learned JMFC, Rourkela in 1CC Case No. 539 of 2012, which has been confirmed in appeal by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela vide order dated 05.02.2015 in Criminal Appeal No.13 of 2014. Page 3 of 6 3. Since the aforementioned three revision petitions are arising out of a dispute regarding dishonor of cheques issued by the petitioner and the petitioner has been convicted by the court below which has been affirmed by the appellate court, the petitioner by way of aforementioned three revision petitions have assailed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, all the petitions are taken up analogously. 4. All the three revision petitions were taken up together since there is common dispute between the petitioner and the opposite party. During pendency of the revision petitions, parties have entered into an out of court settlement. The petitioner has filed affidavit dated 13.07.2026 spelling out the terms of settlement, which are reproduced below:- “2) That in view of the direction of this Hon’ble Court and I am filing this affidavit regarding the payment of Rs.11,50,000/- as compensation amount to the opposite parties in above three criminal revision cases. 3) That today I am handing over a A/c payee demand draft dated 04.07.2026 amounting to Rs.2 lakhs to the opposite party no.2 i.e. Umang Agrawal vide Draft No.861683. 4) That the rest amount i.e. Rs.9,50,000/- will be paid to the opp.party no.2 on installment basis. 5) That the 1st installment of Rs.3 lakhs will be paid to the opp. party no.2 within a period of two months from today, i.e. on 14.09.2026. 6) That the 2nd installment of Rs.2,25,000/- will be paid to the opp. party no.2 within a period of two months from the date of payment of 1st installment i.e. on 14.11.2026. 7) That the 3rd installment of Rs.2,25,000/- will be paid to the opp. party no.2 within a period of two months from the date of payment of 2nd installment i.e. on 14.01.2027. 8) That the 4th installment of Rs.2,00,000/- will be paid to the opp. party no.2 within a period of two months from the date of payment of 3rd installment i.e. on 14.03.2027. 9) That, all the above installments shall be paid by way of demand draft through advocate for the petitioner and in case of failure to pay any installment, the opposite party shall have the right to revive the present revision applications. 10) That in view of the circumstances the conviction and sentenced passed by the learned trial court as well as appellate court may be set aside in connection with 1CC Case No.538 of 2012, ICC Case No.540 of 2012 and ICC Case No. 539 of 2012 which is in the file of learned JMFC, Rourkela.” 5. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the opposite party, on instruction, submits that his client is agreeable to the aforementioned terms of settlement. 6. To demonstrate the bonafide, the petitioner, by way of a demand draft, being D.D. No.861683 dated 04.07.2026 amounting to Rs.2,00,000/- in the name of the opposite party, has handed over to the counsel for the opposite party in Court today. The counsel for the opposite party has accepted the demand draft by placing an acknowledgment on record. 7. Both the counsel appearing for the parties conjointly submit that all the three revision petitions can be disposed of on terms of the affidavit dated 13.07.2026 filed by the petitioner/convict. It is also agreed by the parties that the installments to be paid towards the settlement amount is to be abide by the petitioner, as per the schedule in the terms of settlement. In the event of failure on the part of the petitioner to comply the timeline of the payment of the installment, the opposite party would reserve his right to revive the revision petitions by moving appropriate application before this Court. The petitioner, besides the affidavit dated 13.07.2026, also undertakes to comply the terms of settlement scrupulously. It is relevant to mention here that on the last date of hearing, i.e., on 07.07.2026, the petitioner/convict was present in Court and he has made a categorical statement that whatever the terms of settlement is worked out, he would comply the same. 8. In the event of failure on the part of the petitioner to comply the terms of settlement, the opposite party may revive the revision petitions. Further, in the event the petitioner fails to comply as per the terms of settlement, the amount paid by way of first installment, i.e., Rs.2,00,000/- shall stand forfeited and the revision petitions would be revived on the application of the opposite party. 9. In the event, the entire payment as per the schedule is paid by the petitioner, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the courts below, which has been confirmed by the appellate courts in all the three revision petitions, shall stand set aside and the petitioner would be acquitted. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Criminal Revision petitions are disposed of. Ashok ( S.S. Mishra) Judge MOHAPATRA