[2025:RJ-JP:38531] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 282/2023 Anil Mehra S/o Shri Hanuman Prasad, R/o House No. 3/68, Kanchan Nagar, Housing Board Colony, Gram Dorai Tehsil And District Ajmer ----Petitioner/accused Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor 2. Shri Rehmatullah S/o Shri Abdul Sattar, R/o Village Rasol Pura Tehsil And District Ajmer ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshad Kapoor, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh Choudhary, P.P. Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 19/09/2025 : Instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of accused/ petitioner under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being aggrieved by judgment dt.21.02.2023 passed by Court of ld. Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Ajmer, in Criminal Appeal No.02/2022, whereby the appeal filed by petitioner has been dismissed & the judgment dt.14.12.2021 passed by Court of ld. Special Judicial Magistrate, (N.I. Act Cases) No.2, Ajmer, in Criminal Regular Case No.2464/2017, convicting the petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, sentencing him to undergo six months simple imprisonment & ordering to pay a fine of Rs.60,000/- to complainant-respondent as compensation & in default thereof to further undergo 15-days additional simple imprisonment, has been affirmed. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant-respondent No.2 has filed a complaint u/s.138 of N.I. Act against the petitioner before ld. trial Court alleging therein that petitioner had issued a cheque [2025:RJ-JP:38531] (2 of 4) [CRLR-282/2023] amounting to Rs.45,000/- to the complainant, which on presentation was returned with the remarks “Account Closed”. The trial Court has convicted the petitioner for alleged offence & sentenced him to undergo maximum period of six months simple imprisonment alongwith compensation. The ld. Appellate Court, while dismissing the appeal, has confirmed the judgment of conviction & the order of sentence awarded by the ld. trial Court. Submissions of learned counsel appearing for the accused- petitioner are that the petitioner was on bail during trial as well as appeal and presently, he is confined in Central Jail at Ajmer since 27.08.2025. The parties have entered into a compromise & the dispute between them has been amicably settled & 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 petitioner be acquitted from the charges levelled against him in terms of compromise. In this regard, an application bearing Inward No.1/2025 dt.03.02.2025 has also been filed by the petitioner praying therein that while taking on record the compromise, the present revision petition may be disposed of in the light of compromise. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant/respondent No.2 does not wish to continue the matter & has no objection, if the impugned orders are quashed & set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the charges levelled against her in terms of compromise. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the material made available on record. The application filed by the petitioner for suspension of sentence was allowed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dt.22.03.2023 & the petitioner was released on bail during [2025:RJ-JP:38531] (3 of 4) [CRLR-282/2023] pendency of the present revision petition. The aforesaid order was recalled & the bail bonds in pursuance thereof were forfeited. Vide order dt.15.09.2023 the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court issued arrest warrant & given direction to initiate the proceedings u/s.446 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2025. 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 petitioner. The complainant is present-in-person before this Court. He has been identified by his Counsel & his signature has been obtained on the order-sheet of the Court. In compliance of the order passed by this Court today, the petitioner has also deposited the cost of Rs.5,000/- in the account of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur vide receipt No.0006 & submitted his receipt, which is taken on record. As per compromise dt.24.01.2025, the dispute between the parties regarding cheque amount has been settled & the complainant has received complete amount & fine. Now, the complainant does not wish to continue the mater & has no objection, if the impugned orders are quashed & set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the charges levelled against him 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. [2025:RJ-JP:38531] (4 of 4) [CRLR-282/2023] 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 petitioner from the charges & allow the revision petition filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed in terms of compromise. The proceedings, if any pending under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. are, hereby, dropped. The impugned orders are quashed & set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the charges levelled against him. The petitioner is said to be in judicial custody. He shall be released from the prison forthwith, if not required in any other case. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. Let a copy of this order be sent to the ld. Trial Court concerned. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J ashok