1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.110 of 2025 …. Md. Saquib Ansari, son of Late Md. Istekhar, aged about 25 years, Resident of Village-Dumaria, P.S. Dumaria, P.O.-Dumaria, District-East Singhbhum ……Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rohit Kumar Jain, son of Sajjain Kumar Jain, Proprietor of M/S Jain Stores Ghatshila, P.O. & P.S. Ghatshila District-East Singbhum ……Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Srestha, A.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Naresh Prasad, Advocate …… Order No.05/27.02.2025 I.A. No.12969 of 2024 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 28.09.2024 passed by Sri Kamlesh Kumar Shukla, learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ghatshila in Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 2023 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 25.03.2023 passed by Ms. Sushila Soreng, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila in Complaint Case No. 277 of 2021 T.R. Case No.325 of 2023 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments (N.I.) Act and sentenced to undergo S.I. for six (6) months and pay compensation of Rs.3,20,000/- (Three Lakhs Twenty Thousand) under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. 2. I.A. No.12969 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and O.P. No.2 by way of Joint Compromise Petition 2 dated 03.12.2024 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2. It is submitted that Rs.2,40,000/- (Rs. Two Lakh forty Thousand) has been paid to the O.P. No.2 by the petitioner by way of full and final settlement and hence, the impugned judgment dated 28.09.2024 and 25.03.2023 passed by the learned Appellate Court and judgment of learned Trial Court below may be set aside and the petitioner may be acquitted and this Criminal Revision Application may by allowed. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 raised no objection. 5. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has admitted the factum of compromise and admitted of receiving of Rs.2,40,000/- (Rs. Two Lakh Forty Thousand) from the petitioner and submitted that the O.P. No.2 has no grievances against the petitioner. 6. Perused the I.A. No.12969 of 2024 and considered the submission of both the sides. 7. Paragraph No. 5 to 8 of the I.A. No.12969 of 2024 paragraph No.5,6,7 and 8 read as follows:- “Paragraph-5:-That it is humbly stated that in view of the compromise taken place between the petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2/ Complainant, namely, Rohit Kumar Jain the parties have settled this case on as amount of Rs.2,40,000/-(Rs. Two Lakhs and Forty Thousand) only. Paragraph-6:-That it is humbly stated that the petitioner Md. Saquib Ansari had already paid Rs.2,40,000/- on 14.11.2024 only had been paid to the complaint in full and final settlement of the instant case and to this effect, the complaint, Rohit Kumar Jain has also issued a Cash Money Receipt in favour of the petitioner in presence of witnesses. Paragraph-7:- That it is humbly stated and submitted that since the dispute is purely a personal and monetary 3 dispute between the parties and no public policy is involved, it is a fit case where this Hon’ble Court can exercise its jurisdiction for setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence in terms of this compromise petition. Paragraph-8:-That it is humbly stated and submitted that the compromise has been entered into between the parties amicably without any coercion and threat.” 8. It appears that the photocopy of money receipt dated 14.11.2024 showing the payment of Rs.2,40,000/- (Rs.Two Lakhs Forty Thousand) by the petitioner to the O.P. No.2 is enclosed as Annexure-1. 9. The above I.A. No.12696 of 2024 has been signed by Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Naresh Pd. Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2 and the petitioner namely Md. Saquib and the Opposite Party No.2 namely Rohit Kumar Jain have also sworn their respective affidavits and put their respective signatures and their Aadhaar Card have also been enclosed in I.A. No.12969 of 2024 which are kept at page no.13 to 16 respectively. 10. Under the circumstances, the parties are permitted to get the case compromised accordingly. 11. On the facts and the circumstances of this case, the judgment dated 28.09.2024 passed by Sri Kamlesh Kumar Shukla, learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ghatshila in Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 2023 and judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.03.2023 passed by Ms. Sushila Soreng, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila in Complaint Case No. 277 of 2021 T.R. Case No.325 of 2023, are set aside in the interest of justice and in the light of Joint Compromise Petition dated 03.12.2024 filed by both the parties. 4 12. Accordingly, the petitioner namely Md. Saquib Ansari is acquitted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. 13. Thus, this Criminal Revision No.110 of 2025 and thus, I.A. No.12969 of 2024 are allowed in terms of compromise and stand disposed of. 14. Pending I.A if any, stands disposed of. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-