Genuine compromise in cheque dishonour cases can support revisional relief and setting aside conviction and sentence.

A genuine, voluntary and bona fide compromise in a cheque dishonour prosecution can justify revisional interference to secure the ends of justice. The High Court treated the complainant's confirmation that nothing remained due and that she had no objection as evidence of a valid settlement, and held that compounding was consistent with the statutory scheme governing Negotiable Instruments Act offences. On that basis, the conviction, sentence and appellate order were set aside in revision, subject to deposit of the stipulated amount.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction and sentence for dishonour of cheque under the Negotiable Instruments Act could be set aside in revision on the basis of a genuine compromise between the parties.

Analysis: The complainant affirmed that the dispute had been compromised, that nothing remained due, and that she had no objection to the revision being allowed. The Court treated the compromise as genuine and bona fide. It noted that revisional jurisdiction could be exercised to secure the ends of justice, and that compounding of the offence was consistent with the statutory scheme permitting compromise in cheque dishonour matters.

Conclusion: The conviction, sentence, and appellate order were set aside, and the revision was allowed on the basis of compromise, subject to deposit of the stipulated amount.

Final Conclusion: A valid and bona fide compromise in a cheque dishonour case justified interference in revision and resulted in setting aside the criminal liability.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the compromise in a cheque dishonour prosecution is genuine, voluntary, and bona fide, the revisional court may exercise jurisdiction to give effect to the settlement and secure the ends of justice by setting aside the conviction and sentence.

---