IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.228 of 2017 …. Md. Halim Ansari, S/O :- Late Md. Basiruddin, Resident of Village:- Hugir, P.O. & P.S.:- Pithoria, District- Ranchi ……Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Pradip Kumar S/o Late Murli Manohar Sahu R/o Vill.+ P.O. + P.S. Ormanjhi, Dist- Ranchi ……Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mrs Nirupama, Advocate …… ORAL JUDGMENT IN COURT Order No.11/24.01.2025 I.A. No.13442 of 2024 This Criminal Revision application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 25.04.2016 in Criminal Appeal No.201 of 2015 passed by Md. Taufiqul Hassan, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner XI, Ranchi by which the Criminal Appeal has been filed by petitioner has dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 07.10.2015 passed by Shri Rajesh Kumar No.2, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No.786 of 2010 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo S.I. for four months and to pay the fine of Rs.1,20,000/- by way of compensation to the complainant-Opposite Party No.2 under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. 2. I.A. No. 13442 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the both the parties by way of Joint Compromise Petition dated 16.12.2024. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned judgments and sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is further submitted that this case has been compromised between the petitioner and Opposite Party No.2 and the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (One Lakh Twenty Thousand) to Opposite Party No.2. Hence, the impugned judgment dated 25.04.2016 passed by the learned Appellate Court and judgment of learned Trial Court below may be set aside and this Criminal Revision Application may by allowed. 4. On the other hand, no objection raised by learned A.P.P. 5. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 also admitted the factum of compromise and submitted that the Opposite Party No.2 has received a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- from the petitioner and he has no grievances against the petitioner. 6. Perused the I.A. No.13442 of 2024 and considered the submission of both the sides. 7. Paragraph Nos.4 to 6 of the I.A No.13442 of 2024 read as follows:- “Para-4:- That it is stated that the matter was sent for mediation which was failed but later both the parties sat together and compromised the matter and the complainant/ O.P. No.2 has received Rs.1,20,000 (Rs. One lakhs Twenty Thousand) from the petitioner. Para-5:- That it is stated that O.P. No.2 namely Pradeep Kumar has in writing stated in stamp paper that he has received his money and he wants to compromise and close the case. Para-6:- That his application is being made bona fide and in the interest of justice.” 8. The above I.A. No.13442 of 2024 has been signed by Mrs. Vani Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Nirupama, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2 and the petitioner namely Md. Halim Ansari and the Opposite Party No.2 namely Pradeep Kumar have also 3 sworn their respective affidavits and put their respective signatures and their Aadhaar Card have also been enclosed in I.A. No.13442 of 2024 which are kept at page no.5, 5/A, 6 and 6/A respectively. 9. It appears that the Opposite Party No.2 has no grievance against the petitioner and the Opposite party No.2 received a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Twenty Thousand) from the petitioner. 10. Under the circumstances, the parties are permitted to get the case compromised accordingly. 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the impugned judgments dated 25.04.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.201 of 2015 by Md. Taufiqul Hassan, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner XI, Ranchi and the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 07.10.2015 passed by Shri Rajesh Kumar No.2, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No.786 of 2010 are set aside in the interest of justice and in the light of Joint Compromise Petition dated 16.12.2024 filed by both the parties. 12. Accordingly, the petitioner namely Md. Halim Ansari is acquitted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the petitioner is discharged from the liability of his bail bonds. 13. Thus, this Criminal Revision No.228 of 2018 and I.A. No.13442 of 2024 are allowed in terms of compromise and stand disposed of. 14. Pending I.A if any, stands disposed of. 15. Let the original Lower Court Records be sent to the learned Court below at once by the office. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-