High Court of DelhiCRL.REV.P./104/2017

Rajesh Tijeeya v. State & ANR

2017-09-22Hon'Ble Mr. Justice S.P.Garg2 pages

$~56 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P. 104/2017 RAJESH TIJEEYA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Anil Dutt Sharma, Advocate versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for State

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 22.09.2017 Crl. M.A. No. 15880/2017 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Application is disposed of.

Crl. M.A. No. 15878/2017 (delay) For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 49 days is condoned.

Application is disposed of.

Crl. M.A. No. 15879/2017 (restoration) Notice.

Learned APP accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 is present in person and accepts notice. He submits that he has no objection if the revision petition is restored. Accordingly, revision petition 104/2017 is restored to its original numbers. Application is disposed of.

CRL.REV.P. 104/2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner says that petitioner and respondent no.2 have settled their disputes amicably vide Memorandum of Understanding dated 11th September, 2017.

The petitioner has paid `5,50,000/- to respondent no.2 towards full and final settlement of all the claims of respondent no.2 in respect of three cheques. Respondent no.2 admits having settled the matter with the petitioner and also admits having received entire settled amount. He says that he has no objection if offence under Section 138 NI Act is permitted to be compounded.

In view of the settlement arrived at between petitioner and respondent no.2, offence under Section 138 NI Act is compounded and petitioner is acquitted.

Petition stands disposed of.

Dasti A.K. PATHAK, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2017 sm