[2025:RJ-JP:17725] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1298/2012 Rajendra Yadav Son of Shri Hanuman Yadav, Resident of Village Motipura, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer ----Accused-Petitioner Versus 1.State Of Rajasthan through PP 2. Gulzar Bhai (Mohd. Gulzar) Son of Abdul Gaffar, Resident of House no. 374-B, Dari Mohalla, Nasirabad, Ajmer. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav Mr. Rakesh Trivedi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Singhal Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 21/04/2025 1. Instant revision petition is preferred aggrieved from dismissal of criminal regular appeal no. 159/2008 (72/2008) (68/2008) by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act cases, Ajmer on 28.07.2012 whereby judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.02.2008 in criminal case no. 639/2004 under Section 138 of NI Act passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Nasirabad, District Ajmer was affirmed but sentence was reduced. 2. Initially, on a complaint filed by respondent complainant Gulzar Bhai @ Mohd. Gulzar under Section 138 of NI Act learned Judicial Magistrate, Nasirabad has convicted present petitioner Rajendra Yadav under Section 138 of NI Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment of one year. The trial court has also [2025:RJ-JP:17725] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1298/2012] imposed ₹7,00,000/- as compensation. The appellate court while affirming conviction under Section 138 of NI Act has reduced period of sentence from one year to six months. This revision petition is sent to Rajasthan High Court Mediation Center for exploring chances of settlement between the parties. With effort of the mediator, the parties have settled their dispute and on the basis of compromise between the parties, the mediation was successful. 3. Learned counsel for the parties present before this Court submits that on the basis of settlement between the parties, the revision petition may be disposed of. 4. Having considered the fact that both the parties have entered into compromise and the compromise is filed on record, therefore, on the basis of compromise the instant revision petition is disposed of. 5. As a result of compromise, the instant revision petition is hereby allowed and the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.02.2008 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Nasirabad and affirmed on 28.07.2012 by the appellate court is set aside. On the basis of compromise the petitioner accused Rajendra Yadav is acquitted under Section 138 of NI Act. The respondent complainant is entitled for refund/release of ₹1,85,000/- deposited before the trial court in pursuant to order dated 20.07.2018 in criminal appeal (SOS) application no. 351/2018 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 6. The trial court is directed to release/refund ₹1,85,000/- to respondent complainant. After compromise between the parties, [2025:RJ-JP:17725] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1298/2012] nothing survives in the revision petition. Hence, the revision petition is disposed with all pending applications. 7. The compromise shall be integral part of the order and a copy be sent to the trial court with record for compliance. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /72