Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010086362026 2026:GAU-AS:7714 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./243/2026 SRI RITUPARNA DAS S/O SRI ARUN DAS R/O VILL- KOKORATOLI, P.O. TINSUKIA P.S. TINSUKIA DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM VERSUS SRI ARPAN CHETIA S/O LATE PURANDAR CHETIA R/O NARSHING GAON P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM PIN-786125 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HASAN, MR SUBHRAJIT SAIKIA,MR. I K BURAGOHAIN,MR. A HASAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR. K K DEY, MR. V K BAROOAH Page No.# 2/3 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 03.06.2026 Heard Mr. N. Hasan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 438/442 of the BNSS, 2023 challenging the judgment dated 28.01.2026 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Criminal Appeal No.14(3) of 2025 affirming and modifying the judgment dated 20.06.2025 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia in N.I. Case No.111/2020. 3. The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 1(one) year and to pay a fine of ₹10,000,00/- with default stipulations. The learned appellate court affirmed the judgment of the trial court and modified the jail sentence to 3(three) months of rigorous imprisonment. The remaining part of the sentence was not touched by the appellate court. 4. Today, Mr. N. Hasan as well as Mr. K.K. Dey have jointly submitted that the petitioner has already paid the amount of ₹10,000,00/- to the respondent and the respondent is no longer interested in sending the petitioner to jail for serving the sentence. The respondent has filed an affidavit to that effect. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 6. The respondent has received the amount of ₹10,000,00/- and he is no longer is Page No.# 3/3 interested in the present petitioner going to serve the sentence of 3(three) months. It is the wish of the respondent and the court has to agree with him. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the revision petition is allowed. 8. Both the judgments dated 28.01.2026 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Criminal Appeal No.14(3) of 2025 affirming and modifying the judgment dated 20.06.2025 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia in N.I. Case No.111/2020, are set aside. With the aforesaid direction, the criminal revision petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant