1. Rule.
Learned advocate Mr. Dholakia for the respondent No.1 waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent No.1 and for respondent No.2 - State, learned APP Mr. Jani wavies service of Rule.
2. By way of this Revision Application, the applicant has challenged the order dated 10.6.2011 passed in Criminal Case No.961 of 2002 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kheralu, whereby the applicant - accused is convicted and ordered to suffer one year S.I. and fine of Rs.5000/- and it is directed the applicant to pay Rs.1,70,000/- as compensation to the complainant, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is also directed the applicant that in default of payment of fine amount of Rs.5000/-, the applicant has to suffer S.I. for one month and if the applicant fails to pay the amount of Rs.1,70,000/- as compensation, he has to suffer S.I. for three months. The applicant has also challenged the order dated 20.1.2012 passed below Exhibit 15 in Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2011 by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, Camp at Visnagar. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has quashed and set aside the order to pay the amount of Rs.1,70,000/- by way of compensation, in default of payment of compensation, the applicant has to suffer S.I. for three months and has held that other part of the order shall remain unaltered.
3. Today, the matter is listed for hearing before this Court. The original accused applicant is produced before this Court through jail under Police Surveillance.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Havewalla for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Dholakia for the original complainant, both have stated that the dispute is amicably settled between the parties outside the Court. In support of the settlement, the affidavit-in-reply stating the settlement is taken place between the parties is produced, which is ordered to be taken on record. Both the learned advocates have stated that 75% of the amount towards compensation is deposited before this Court and 25% of the amount of the compensation, is deposited before the Appellate Court, Mehsana. Learned advocate Mr. Havewalla has stated that the complainant may be permitted to withdraw the said amount.
5. Perused the application along with papers. I have verified the affidavit filed by the original complainant, wherein the complainant has stated that after filing this Revision, the offence and grievance is compromised and compounded between the complainant and accused. He has no objection if the orders passed by the Courts below are quashed and set aside. The affidavit is bearing the signatures of the complainant and applicant - accused as well as both the learned advocates for the parties.
6. In view of the settlement took place between the parties, the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kheralu in Criminal Case No.961 of 2002 dated 10.6.2011 as well as the order dated 20.1.2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2011 are quashed and set aside. The applicant is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required in connection with any other case. Rule is made absolute accordingly. The complainant is permitted to withdraw the amount as deposited by the applicant. Record and Proceedings are ordered to be sent back to the concerned trial Court, if called for. Direct service is permitted today.
(Z.K.SAIYED,J.) ynvyas Top