Ravinder vs.state & Anr.

Ravinder vs State & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 02, 2018

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1216690

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/1216690
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Aug 02, 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

Ravinder

Respondent

State & Anr.

Excerpt

.....rtgs. respondent company accordingly gave a no objection certificate dated 21.06.2018.4. on 11.07.2018, representative of respondent no.2 was present in court and confirmed that the petitioner had paid the entire settlement amount of rs. 4 lakhs. respondent no.2 had further confirmed that he has no objection to the compounding of the subject offence.5. keeping in view the statements of the parties, this court directed the petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount as costs with the delhi legal services authority in terms of the judgment of the supreme court ‘damodar s. prabhu vs. sayed babalal h.’, 2010(5) scc663 and consequently the petitioner has deposited 15% of the cheque amount being rs. 55,500/-. receipt dated 23.07.2018 of the same has been produced. keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has settled with page 2 of 3 6. crl.rev.p. 578-2018 respondent no.2 and paid the settlement amount of rs. 4 lakhs and also deposited the cost of 15% of the cheque amount, in terms of the judgment in ‘damodar s. prabhu (supra), the subject offence is compounded. the petition is accordingly allowed. the petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under section 138 of the n.i. act.7. consequently, orders issuing nbws and initiating the proceedings under section 82 cr. p.c. are set aside.8. order dasti under signatures of the court master. sanjeev sachdeva, j august02 2018 ‘rs’ crl.rev.p. 578-2018 page 3 of 3

Full Judgment

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:

02. 08.2018 CRL.REV.P. 578/2018 RAVINDER STATE & ANR versus ........ Petitioner

..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

For the Respondent : Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate. : Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Addl. PP for the State CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT0208.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) CRL.REV.P. 637/2018 & CRL.M.A.12373/2018 (stay) & Crl. M. (Bail) 1098/2018 1. The petitioner impugns order on conviction dated 26.04.2018 and order on sentence dated 04.05.2018 passed by the trial court as also the order dated 31.05.2018 of the appellate court rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner was convicted of the offence punishable under CRL.REV.P. 578-2018 Page 1 of 3 Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The subject cheque was of Rs. 3,70,000/-. The petitioner was sentenced to under simple imprisonment for a period of one month as also to pay a sum of Rs. 3,42,000/- as compensation to the complainant.

3. The petitioner and respondent No.2 have settled their disputes and the petitioner had agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs to respondent No.2. The petitioner on 06.06.2018 paid a sum of Rs. One lakh and on 08.06.2018 transferred a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs to respondent No.2 through RTGS. Respondent company accordingly gave a No Objection Certificate dated 21.06.2018.

4. On 11.07.2018, representative of respondent No.2 was present in Court and confirmed that the petitioner had paid the entire settlement amount of Rs. 4 lakhs. Respondent No.2 had further confirmed that he has no objection to the compounding of the subject offence.

5. Keeping in view the statements of the parties, this Court directed the petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount as costs with the Delhi Legal Services Authority in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court ‘Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.’, 2010(5) SCC663 and consequently the petitioner has deposited 15% of the cheque amount being Rs. 55,500/-. Receipt dated 23.07.2018 of the same has been produced. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has settled with Page 2 of 3 6. CRL.REV.P. 578-2018 respondent No.2 and paid the settlement amount of Rs. 4 lakhs and also deposited the cost of 15% of the cheque amount, in terms of the judgment in ‘Damodar S. Prabhu (supra), the subject offence is compounded. The petition is accordingly allowed. The petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

7. Consequently, orders issuing NBWs and initiating the proceedings under Section 82 Cr. P.c. are set aside.

8. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J AUGUST02 2018 ‘rs’ CRL.REV.P. 578-2018 Page 3 of 3

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