31.05.2026 Sl. No.16. D/L. Mithun. Ct.No.29. IA No: CRAN 6 of 2026 In CRR/3049/2025 Nikhil Gupta Vs. Naresh Kumar Agarwal & Anr. Mr. Surojit Roy …for the petitioner Mr. Sourav Paul, Mr. Tanumoy Ghosh …for opposite party no.1 The petitioner herein is aggrieved with the order dated 16.04.2025 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, City Sessions Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta in Criminal Appeal No.115 of 2018 by which the Court below affirmed the judgment and order dated 09.08.2018 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court, Calcutta in connection with Complaint Case No.C-277 of 2013. By the impugned judgment dated 09.08.2018, the Trial Court convicted the petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and thereby sentenced him to pay a sum of Rs.5,50,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of 3 months. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, petitioner/convict preferred an appeal before the Appellate Court being Criminal Appeal No.115 of 2018 and the Appellate Court by its judgment dated 16th April, 2025 was pleased to dismiss the appeal and 2 thereby affirmed the conviction and sentence order passed by the Trial Court on 09.08.2018. Being aggrieved by both the orders of conviction and sentence, petitioner/convict preferred the instant application contending that judgment and orders passed by learned Courts below are illogical and not consistent with the mandated provision of law. They failed to appreciate the deposition of DW 1 in its proper perspective. The learned Courts below also failed to consider the exhibited documents, i.e., money receipts in respect of part payment and, therefore, the proceeding was not adjudicated properly. However, during pendency of the instant application, the parties have amicably settled their disputes and they have filed a connected application being CRAN 6 of 2026 signed by complainant/opposite party and the petitioner. In terms of said amicable settlement, it appears from Paragraph 12 that the petitioner and the opposite party no.1 settled the amount at Rs.5,00,000/- out of which the petitioner has already deposited Rs.2.5 lakhs which has been withdrawn by the opposite party no.1 and the remaining balance of Rs.2.5 lakhs has been paid through pay order today by the petitioner to learned Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1. Copy of said pay order is kept with the record. In such circumstances, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the offence may be compounded in terms of the amicable settlement. 3 Petitioner in support of his contention has relied upon one judgment of the Apex Court passed in Anil Kumar Haritwal Vs. Alka Gupta reported in 2004 AIR SC 3978. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party submits that in terms of settlement, he has already received the pay order and, therefore, he does not want to proceed further and the offence may be compounded as sought for in the application. In view of above, the impugned proceeding initiated by the opposite party herein against the petitioner under the Section 138 of the N.I.Act is hereby compounded on the basis of the prayer made on behalf of the complainant. The judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed on 09.08.2018 in Complaint Case No.C-277 of 2013 by Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court, Calcutta and the judgment of affirmation passed in Criminal Appeal No.115 of 2018 on 16.04.2025 by 2nd Fast Track Court, City Sessions Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta are hereby set aside. The petitioner is hereby acquitted from the said offence CRR 3049 of 2025 along with CRAN 6 of 2026 thus, stands disposed of. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. ( Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J. )