The Court disposed of cheque-dishonour revisions in terms of the parties’ voluntary settlements.

The petitioner challenged convictions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in four separate revision petitions.

During the revisions, the parties settled their disputes and filed joint memos.

In Crl.R.P. Nos. 105/2024, 42/2022 and 804/2024, the petitioner agreed to pay the outstanding portions of the respective fine amounts—Rs. 2,50,000, Rs. 4,30,000 and Rs. 10,00,000—in instalments; the respondents had already withdrawn the amounts deposited.

In Crl.R.P. No. 106/2024, the respondent acknowledged receipt of the entire fine amount of Rs. 5,00,000.

1. Whether the Court should dispose of the revision petitions in terms of the parties’ settlement, including the agreed payment arrangements.

2. Whether the trial-court orders requiring payment of Rs. 10,000 in each case as expenses of the State should remain in force after settlement.

The revisions were brought under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging convictions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The Court recorded that it had perused the joint memos and, on enquiry, found the settlement voluntary and lawful; it did not refer to any precedent or set out a further statutory test for disposing of the petitions on settlement.

The Court accepted the parties’ settlement after examining the joint memos and enquiring into its voluntariness and lawfulness.

For three petitions, it gave effect to the agreed instalment arrangements; in the fourth, it relied on the respondent’s acknowledgment that the full amount had been received.

As the matters were resolved on those terms, the Court disposed of the revisions without determining the merits of the underlying convictions.

It also set aside the Rs. 10,000 State-expense orders in all four matters.

Crl.R.P. No. 106/2024 was disposed of in terms of its joint memo upon acknowledgment that the full Rs. 5,00,000 had been paid.

The Rs. 10,000 amounts ordered as expenses of the State were set aside in each petition.