[2025:RJ-JP:33608] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1466/2025 Satish son of Damodar, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Plot No,. 23. Raja Ki Kothi Ke Samne, Anand Vihar Colony, Mandrayal Road, Karauli Police Station Kotwali Karauli District Karauli (Raj) (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur) ----Petitioner/accused Versus Kailash son of Raghuvar Singh, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Panchana Colony Karauli Police Station Kotwali Karauli District Karauli (Raj) ----Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vipul Jain, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadaun, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 25/08/2025 : Instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of accused/ petitioner under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, being aggrieved by judgment dt.07.08.2025 passed by Court of ld. Sessions Judge, Karauli, in Criminal Appeal No.10/2025 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed & the judgment dt.29.01.2025 passed by the Court of ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karauli, in Criminal Regular Case No.436/2022 convicting the petitioner for commission of offences punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act & sentencing him to undergo two years simple imprisonment with compensation of Rs.3,20,000/- to be paid to complainant & in default thereof, to further undergo three months additional imprisonment, has been affirmed. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant-respondent has filed a complaint u/s.138 of N.I. Act against the petitioner before ld. [2025:RJ-JP:33608] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1466/2025] trial Court alleging therein that the petitioner had issued a cheque amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- to the complainant, which on presentation was returned with the remarks “insufficient funds”. The trial Court has convicted the petitioner for alleged offence & sentenced him to undergo maximum period of two years rigorous imprisonment alongwith compensation. The appellate Court, while dismissing the appeal, has confirmed the judgment of conviction & the order of sentence awarded by the trial Court. Today, complainant – Kailash is present-in-person before this Court. He has duly been identified by his respective Counsel & his signature has been obtained on the order-sheet of the Court. Learned Advocates appearing for the parties submit that the petitioner was on bail during trial & appeal and presently, he is in judicial custody. Ld. Advocates further submit that during pendency of the revision petition, both the parties have entered into a compromise outside the Court & the dispute between them has amicably been settled and now the complainant, present-in-person does not wish to continue the matter. Therefore, the present petition may be allowed, the impugned orders be quashed & set aside and the petitioner be acquitted from the charges levelled against him in view of the facts of the compromise. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the impugned orders as well as the material made available on record. The dispute is inter-se in between the parties and does not affect the society at large. The complainant has now entered into a compromise with the present petitioner. The aim & purpose of Section 138 of N.I. Act is not to punish the accused but to ensure that the due amount is duly returned to the complainant. Considering the nature of litigation under Section [2025:RJ-JP:33608] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1466/2025] 138 of N.I. Act in case the amount is paid and is duly accepted by the complainant, the matter should be compounded and the accused should be acquitted. Since the parties have not entered into compromise at the first opportunity available to them and waited till disposal of the trial & appeal and wasted precious judicial time of the Court, in the interest of justice, a cost of Rs.10,000/- be imposed upon the petitioner. The petitioner shall deposit the above-said cost in the account of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur, during the course of the day and submit the receipt to this Court. Thus, in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties outside the Court, as stated, this Court deems it just & proper to acquit the petitioner from the charges & allow the revision petition filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed. The impugned orders are quashed & set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the charges levelled against him. The petitioner is said to be in judicial custody. He shall be released from the prison forthwith, if not required in any other case. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J. ASHOK