[2025:RJ-JP:31705] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1447/2025 1. Bharatpur Network For People Living With HIV/ AIDS Society, Bharatpur (Rajasthan) Through President Gajendra Singh Son Of Shri Bacchu Singh Resident Of Village And Post Farso, Tehsil Bayana District Bharatpur At Present Resident Of Surajpole Chauraha Bharatpur (Rajasthan) 2. Smt. Kusum Soni Wife Of Shri Manoj Soni, Aged About 36 Years, Adjacent To Church Mathura Gate, Bharatpur Secretary Bharatpur Network For People Living Hiv /aids Society Bharatpur (Rajasthan) 3. Gajendra Singh Son Of Bacchu Singh, Aged About 46 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Farso, Tehsil Bayana District Bharatpur At Present Resident Of Surajpole Chaurahe Bharatpur President Bharatpur Network For People Living Hiv/aids Society Bharatpur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioners/accused Versus Smt Sushila Choudhary Wife Of Shri Fateh Singh Choudhary, Resident Of Z P -4 Zila Parishad Road, Krishana Nagar, Bharatpur (Raj) ----Respondent/complainant For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Kumar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Balveer Singh Beniwal, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 13/08/2025 : Instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of accused/ petitioners under Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 being aggrieved by judgment dt.15.10.2024 passed by Court of ld. Additional Sessions Judge, (Women Atrocities), Bharatpur, in Criminal Appeal No.19/2024 (255/22) whereby the appeal filed by petitioners has been partly allowed & the judgment dt.23.11.2022 passed by Court of ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Bharatpur, in Criminal Regular Case No.258/2018 convicting the [2025:RJ-JP:31705] (2 of 4) [CRLR-1447/2025] petitioners for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act & sentencing them to undergo maximum six months simple imprisonment with compensation of Rs.58,000/- to be paid to complainant & in default thereof, to further undergo one month additional simple 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 petitioners before ld. trial Court alleging therein that petitioners had issued a cheque amounting to Rs.40,000/- to the complainant, which on presentation was returned with the remarks “insufficient funds”. The trial Court has convicted the petitioners for the alleged offence & sentenced them to undergo maximum period of six months simple imprisonment alongwith compensation. The appellate Court, while partly allowing the appeal, has modified the judgment, ordered to pay compensation of Rs.48,000/- & maintained the remaining sentences as it is. Submissions of learned counsel appearing for the accused- petitioners are that the petitioners were on bail during trial and presently, they are not in custody. During pendency of revision petition, both the parties have entered into a compromise & the dispute between them has been amicably settled and now the complainant does not wish to continue the matter. Therefore, the present petition may be allowed, the impugned orders be quashed & set aside and the petitioners be acquitted from the charges levelled against them in terms of compromise. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused 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 petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:31705] (3 of 4) [CRLR-1447/2025] In compliance of the order passed by this Court today, both the parties have appeared before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court for verification of compromise & they have been identified by their respective Advocates. The cost of Rs.5,000/- has also been deposited with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur vide receipt No.0022 dt.13.09.2025. Registrar (Judicial) has verified & attested the compromise arrived at between the parties and submitted his report, which is taken on record. As per compromise dt.24.07.2025, both the parties have entered into a compromise & the dispute between them has been amicably settled and the complainant has received complete amount. The complainant does not wish to continue the matter & has no objection, if the impugned orders are quashed & set aside and the petitioners are acquitted from the charges levelled against them in terms of compromise. 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 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. In the present case, the amount of compensation has duly been accepted by the complainant and the compromise is a clear proof thereof. Thus, in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, this Court deems it just & proper to acquit the petitioners from the charges & allow the revision petition filed by the petitioners. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed in terms of compromise. The impugned orders are quashed & set aside [2025:RJ-JP:31705] (4 of 4) [CRLR-1447/2025] and the petitioners are acquitted from the charges levelled against them. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J ASHOK/