Pawan Kumar vs.state & Anr.

Pawan Kumar vs State & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided May 15, 2018

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1215023

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1215023
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: May 15, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pawan Kumar

Respondent

State & Anr.

Excerpt

.....sanjeev sachdeva ms prerna, advocate. mr mukesh kumar, app for the state. mr brijesh kumar gupta for r-2 % order1505.2018 sanjeev sachdeva, j.(oral) crl.rev.p. 482/2015 & crl.m.b.7519/2015(suspension of sentence) & crl.m.a.4687/2018(additional facts) 1.... petitioner impugns judgment dated 01.08.2015 passed by the appellate court upholding the order on conviction dated 21.05.2014 and order on sentence dated 26.05.2014 passed by the trial court in the complaint case under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881. crl.rev.p.482 /2015 page 1 of 3 2.... petitioner was convicted of the said offence and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of two months and directed to pay compensation of twice the cheque amount, i.e. rs.2,00,000/- within a period of 30 days (cheque amount being rs.1 lakh) and in default of payment of compensation amount, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year.3. this sentence was modified to the limited extent by the appellate court; in default sentence was reduced to simple imprisonment of six months.4. parties have settled their disputes and accordingly, respondent no.2 had agreed to receive a total amount of rs.1,50,000/- towards full and final settlement of all his claims.5. respondent no.2 is present in court in person and confirms that he has received the settlement amount of rs. 1,50,000/- and has no objection to the compounding of the said offence.6. in exercise of the powers conferred under section 147 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881, the subject offence is compounded, subject to petitioner depositing 15% of the cheque amount, i.e. rs.15,000/- with the delhi state legal services authority in terms of the judgment of the supreme court in damodar s.prabhu versus sayed babalal h., 2010(5) scc663 the said amount be deposited within a period of two weeks from today and receipt of deposit of the crl.rev.p.482 /2015 page 2 of 3 said amount be furnished to the trial court within three weeks from today.7. in.....

Full Judgment

$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.REV. P. 482/2015 Judgment delivered on:

15. 05.2018 PAWAN KUMAR ........ Petitioner

versus ........ RESPONDENTS

: STATE & ANR. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

For the... RESPONDENTS

: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Ms Prerna, Advocate. Mr Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State. Mr Brijesh Kumar Gupta for R-2 % ORDER

1505.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) CRL.REV.P. 482/2015 & Crl.M.B.7519/2015(suspension of sentence) & Crl.M.A.4687/2018(additional facts) 1.... Petitioner

impugns judgment dated 01.08.2015 passed by the Appellate Court upholding the Order on Conviction dated 21.05.2014 and Order on Sentence dated 26.05.2014 passed by the Trial Court in the Complaint Case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. CRL.REV.P.482 /2015 Page 1 of 3 2.... Petitioner

was convicted of the said offence and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment of two months and directed to pay compensation of twice the cheque amount, i.e. Rs.2,00,000/- within a period of 30 days (cheque amount being Rs.1 lakh) and in default of payment of compensation amount, to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year.

3. This Sentence was modified to the limited extent by the Appellate Court; in default sentence was reduced to Simple Imprisonment of six months.

4. Parties have settled their disputes and accordingly, respondent No.2 had agreed to receive a total amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards full and final settlement of all his claims.

5. Respondent No.2 is present in Court in person and confirms that he has received the settlement amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and has no objection to the compounding of the said offence.

6. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the subject offence is compounded, subject to petitioner depositing 15% of the cheque amount, i.e. Rs.15,000/- with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Damodar S.Prabhu versus Sayed Babalal H., 2010(5) SCC663 the said amount be deposited within a period of two weeks from today and receipt of deposit of the CRL.REV.P.482 /2015 Page 2 of 3 said amount be furnished to the Trial Court within three weeks from today.

7. In view of the above, the Petition is disposed of. The subject offence is compounded. The petitioner is acquitted of the said offence.

8. Consequently, the security deposited by the petitioner with the Registrar General of this Court is discharged and the original security be returned to the petitioner.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MAY15 2018 Sn’ CRL.REV.P.482 /2015 Page 3 of 3

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Pawan Kumar vs State & Anr. Same Subject Land Acquisition