SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CRLR No.243 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. A.M. Saklani, learned counsel for the revisionist. 2. Mr. Nivesh Bahuguna, learned counsel for respondent. 3. Present criminal revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 05.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2023, affirming the judgment dated 17.08.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Criminal Case No. 1232 of 2021. The revisionist was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to four months' simple imprisonment along with a fine of ₹2,10,000/-, out of which ₹2,07,000/- was awarded as compensation to the complainant. In default of payment of fine, the revisionist was directed to undergo two months' further simple imprisonment. 4. There is a delay of 86 days in filing the present criminal revision. The cause shown in the delay condonation application is found to be sufficient. Accordingly, the delay in filing the revision is condoned and the delay condonation application stands allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit that the respondent had instituted Criminal Complaint Case No. 1232 of 2021 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the revisionist; that, the learned trial court, vide judgment and order dated 17.08.2023, convicted the revisionist under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Aggrieved thereby, the revisionist preferred Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2023, which came to be dismissed by the learned appellate court vide judgment and order dated 05.11.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the revisionist would further submit that the cheque in question had been handed over as a blank security cheque at the time of availing a loan facility and that the respondent- company, with an oblique motive, misused the said cheque by filling in the date and amount without the consent of the revisionist. 7. He would further submit that the revisionist is in judicial custody since 08.05.2026. It is contended that the entire cheque amount of ₹1,80,500/- has already been paid by the revisionist to the respondent-company and no amount remains outstanding. In support of the said submission, learned counsel has placed on record a No Dues Certificate issued by the respondent-company, certifying that the revisionist has discharged the entire liability and that no amount remains payable. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent fairly admits that the entire cheque amount of ₹1,80,500/- has been received from the revisionist and that no further amount is recoverable from him. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 10. It is not disputed by the respondent that the entire cheque amount of ₹1,80,500/- has been paid by the revisionist and that no liability now survives against him. Although the courts below had directed payment of a total sum of ₹2,10,000/-, including compensation of ₹2,07,000/- payable to the complainant and ₹3,000/- payable to the State Treasury, learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions, submits that the respondent has no subsisting claim against the revisionist and has no objection if the matter is finally disposed of. 11. Considering the fact that the entire cheque amount stands paid and the respondent has acknowledged full satisfaction of its claim, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the conviction and sentence intact. Consequently, the judgment and order dated 05.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2023, as well as the judgment and order dated 17.08.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1232 of 2021, are hereby set aside. 12. The criminal revision is accordingly allowed. The conviction and sentence awarded to the revisionist under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are hereby quashed. The revisionist shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. 13. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. (Alok Mahra, J.) 08.06.2026 Mamta