Mohit Jain v. Nitin Jain

$~97 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P. 465/2018 MOHIT JAIN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.S. Gandhi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Kr. Mishra, Advocate versus NITIN JAIN ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Pawan K. Bahl & Mr. Bharat Deep Singh, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 31.05.2018 During the course of hearing the matter has been settled between the petitioner (Accused) and respondent. The petitioner has paid Rs. 15 Lacs vide three Demand Drafts, copies whereof are placed on record, to respondent, present in Court, towards the settlement of all his claims regarding cheque in question.

The respondent says that he has no objection in case the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be compounded.

I do not find any reason not to compound the offence in view of the settlement, more so, when the parties have settled the matter inasmuch as the settled amount has been paid. Accordingly, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be compounded. The petitioner is in Jail. He be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.

Revision Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J MAY 31, 2018/rd