Dileep Kumar v. State & ANR

$~45 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P. 565/2017, Crl. M.A. Nos. 12357-58/2017 & Crl. M.B. No. 1414/2017 DILEEP KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through :Mr. Vikram Patralekh and Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, Advs.

versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for the State Mr. T.R. Mittal, Director of respondent no. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 02.08.2017 The Director of respondent no. 2 (complainant) submits that matter has been settled between the petitioner and respondent no. 2, inasmuch as settled amount has already been paid by the petitioner vide a demand draft favouring respondent no. 2, that is, Ramaria Associates Pvt.

Ltd.

Photocopies of the receipt and demand draft have been placed on record as Annexure P-5 (collectively).

Respondent no. 2 has no objection in case offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("the Act", for short) is compounded. In view of the settlement arrived at between

the petitioner and respondent no. 2, offence under Section 138 of the Act is permitted to be compounded. Petitioner is acquitted. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of as infructuous. Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

AUGUST 02, 2017 rb