Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the criminal revision should be disposed of in terms of the compromise between the parties and the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should be set aside.
Analysis: The parties placed on record that the dispute had been amicably settled during the pendency of the revision. The petitioner had paid the entire compensation amount, part by deposit before the court below and the balance directly to the opposite party no.2, who had no objection to the revision being allowed on the basis of the compromise. The State also raised no objection. In these circumstances, the Court found it to give effect to the settlement and secure peace between the parties.
Conclusion: The revision was allowed in terms of the compromise, and the conviction and sentence recorded by the courts below were set aside, in favour of the petitioner.
Final Conclusion: The matter was finally resolved on the basis of the compromise, the petitioner was relieved from the conviction and sentence, and consequential reliefs, including release from custody and release of the deposited amount, were granted.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the parties to a cheque dishonour dispute have fully settled their differences and the complainant no longer objects, the criminal revision may be disposed of in terms of the compromise by setting aside the conviction and sentence to secure the ends of justice.