SMT. SANTOSHI JANGHEL vs OM PRAKASH JAIN

Page 1 of 4

CGHC010342742026 2026:CGHC:39022
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 1131 of 2026
• Smt. Santoshi Janghel W/o Shri Hitesh Kumar Jangde, Aged About 35
Years R/o 20 B.W. Type Central Township Dallirajhara Tahsil -Daundi,
District Balod (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
• Om Prakash Jain S/o Late Shri Nemichand Jain, Aged About 55 Years R/o
New Market, Main Road Dallirajhara, Tahsil -Daundi, District Balod (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order on Board
03.09.2026
1. The applicant has filed the present criminal revision challenging the
impugned order dated 25.08.2026 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned
Sessions Judge, Balod, District Balod (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No.
91/2025 whereby learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal
and affirmed the order dated 23.07.2025 passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Dallirajhara, District Balod in Criminal Case No.
1357 of 2023 wherein the applicant has been convicted for the offence
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and
sentenced to undergo S.I. for 03 months and compensation of Rs.
3,50,000/-, in default of payment of fine additional S.I. for 01 month.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after conviction
order passed by learned Sessions Judge in CRA No. 91 of 2025, the
Digitally
signed by
BHUMIKA
ANGARE
Date:
2026.09.03
15:21:59
+0530
BHUMIKA
ANGARE

Page 2 of 4
applicant and respondent have entered into a compromise by way of
an agreement dated 29.08.2026 (Annexure A/3). He would further
submit that in view of agreement dated 29.08.2026, the applicant
during pendency of the appeal the applicant has paid Rs. 70,000/-
before the learned trial Court and remaining amount i.e. Rs. 2,80,000/-
has been paid through cash on 29.08.2026, as such the total amount
of cheque has already been honored to the respondent. He would
further submit that since compromise has already been arrived at
between the parties, therefore, in light of the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Parsharvanath Weld Wires Pvt.
Ltd. & Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. in CRA No. 2904 of 2026
th
decided on 27 May, 2026 the complaint case can be disposed of. He
would further submit that since the applicant has been arrested on
25.08.2026 itself, he is still in incarceration, therefore, he may be
released on bail.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent has not disputed the said factual
matrix in view of the fact that the applicant and respondent have
already settled their inter se dispute.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. Since the parties have already settled their dispute and the grievance
of the complainant has been redressed by receiving the cheque
amount, as such, the conviction of the applicant can be very well set-
aside by this Court in terms of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in case of Gian Chand Garg Vs. Harpal Singh and Another
reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2317 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has held as under:

Page 3 of 4
"9. In B.V. Seshaiah v. State of Telangana & Anr. (2023)
SCC OnLine SC 96 this court was of the view that when
parties enter into an agreement and compound the
offence, they do so to save themselves from the process of
litigation and when such a step is taken by the parties, the
law very well allows them to do so. Hence, the courts
cannot override such compounding and impose its will.
10. Therefore, it is very clear that although dishonour of
cheque entails criminal consequence, the legislature by
virtue of section 147 of the NI Act has made it
compoundable notwithstanding the provisions of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the same can be
compounded at any stage of the proceedings especially
when the parties have themselves arrived at a voluntary
compromise.
11. In the present case, the compromise deed dated
06.04.2025 and the Affidavit on behalf of the Respondent
No. 1 dated 16.04.2025 is annexed to the present petition
as Annexure P3 and P6, respectively. Upon careful perusal
of the recitals contained in the said documents, it clearly
emerges that the Respondent No.1 in consideration of Two
Demand Drafts bearing no(s). 004348 dated 04.04.2025
and 004303 dated 11.02.2025 for Rs. 2.5 lakhs each along
with three cheques bearing no(s). 354412 dated
10.05.2025, 354413 dated 10.06.2025 and 354414 dated
10.07.2025 of Rs. 1 lakh each has arrived at a
compromise with appellant without any coercion and at his
own will and voluntarily. Once the complainant has signed
the compromise deed accepting the amount in full and
final settlement of the default sum the proceedings under
Section 138 of the NI Act cannot hold water, therefore, the
concurrent conviction rendered by the Courts below has to
be set-aside.
12. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid discussion, we are
of the considered view that the present appeal deserves to
be allowed. Accordingly, the same stands Allowed and
consequently the impugned order dated 27.03.2025 in
CRR 2563 of 2025 is set aside and the order of conviction
and sentence imposed on appellant is quashed."
6. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme court in case of Parsharvanath Weld
Wires Pvt Ltd & Anr. (supra) has taken the same view.
7. Considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
Parsharvanath Weld Wires Pvt Ltd & Anr. (supra) and Gian Chand
Garg (supra) , I am of the view that the complaint filed under Section
138 of the N.I. Act can be set-aside and accordingly the order of

Page 4 of 4
conviction passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class is also
quashed.
8. Accordingly, the instant criminal revision is allowed. It is reported that in
pursuance of order of conviction passed by the learned trial Court as
affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, the applicant is in
incarceration since 25.08.2026, he is directed to be released forthwith
today itself on executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- before the
concerned Judicial Magistrate First Class.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Bhumika