Basant Singh Kumain Vs Ajay Singh Bisht

Uttarakhand High Court 7 Nov 2024 Criminal Revision No. 679 Of 2024, Compounding Application IA No. 5 Of 2024
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Criminal Revision No. 679 Of 2024, Compounding Application IA No. 5 Of 2024

Hon'ble Bench

Ravindra Maithani, J

Advocates

Rakshit Joshi, Gaurav Kandpal

Final Decision

Allowed/ Disposed Of

Acts Referred

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138

Judgement Text

Translate:

Ravindra Maithani, J

1. The challenge in this revision is made to the following:-

(i) Judgment and order dated 02.11.2023, passed in Criminal Complaint No. 27 of 2019, Ajay Singh Bisht Vs. M/S Harsh Associates and Others, by

the court of Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh, District Dehradun (“the caseâ€). By it, the revisionist has been convicted under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (“the Actâ€) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months with a fine of Rs.

24,50,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days;

(ii) Judgment and order dated 10.01.2024, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2023, Basant Singh Kumain Vs. Ajay Singh Bisht, by the court of

Additional Sessions Judge, I, Rishikesh, Distrit Dehradun. By it, the order passed in the case was affirmed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the parties would submit that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and they do not want to proceed with the case now.

A Compounding Application, IA No.5 of 2024, has been filed along with the affidavits of the brother of the revisionist as well as by the respondent.

4. The revisionist is confined in District Jail Dehradun. He has joined the proceedings through video conferencing. The respondent is present in person.

They both are identified by their respective counsel. Both have stated that they have settled the dispute amicably.

5. Since the offence has been compounded, this Court is of the view that while setting aside the impugned judgments and orders, the revisionist is

liable to be acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Act.

6. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. The impugned judgements and orders are set aside. The revisionist is acquitted of the charge under Section

138 of the Act.

7. The revisionist is in jail. Let he be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.

8. Compounding Application No. 5 of 2024 stands disposed of, accordingly.

9. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the learned counsel for the parties, today itself, on payment of usual charges.

From The Blog
Bhim Singh, MLA vs State of Jammu & Kashmir & Others (1985)
Oct
18
2025

Landmark Judgements

Bhim Singh, MLA vs State of Jammu & Kashmir & Others (1985)
Read More
The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. vs The State of Rajasthan and Others (1962)
Oct
18
2025

Landmark Judgements

The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. vs The State of Rajasthan and Others (1962)
Read More