Suresh Kumar vs Vikram Panwar (2026:Rj-Jd:6753)
- Neutral2026:RJ-JD:6750
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
When parties to a criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act enter into a compromise after trial, the High Court may quash a conviction obtained on appeal and restore an acquittal, provided the offence is one that is both bailable and compoundable under law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 178/2026 Suresh Kumar S/o Pukhraj Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, Through His Father Pukhraj Prajapat S/o Jairuparam Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Mithai Ke Dibbe Ki Dukan, Near Sahara Bank Office, Opposite Brahmkumari Ashram, Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj. (Presently Lodged In District Jail, Balotra) ----Petitioner Versus Vikram Panwar S/o Manglaram, R/o Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj. ----Respondent WITH S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 179/2026 Suresh Kumar S/o Pukhraj Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, Through His Father Pukhraj Prajapat S/o Jairuparam Prajapat, R/o Mithai Ke Box Ki Dukan, Near Sahara Bank Office, Opposite Brahmakumari Ashram, Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj.. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail Balotra) ----Petitioner Versus Vikram Panwar S/o Manglaram, R/o Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj.. ----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 180/2026 Suresh Kumar S/o Pukhraj Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, Through His Father Pukhraj Prajapat S/o Jairuparam Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Mithai Ke Dibbe Ki Dukan, Near Sahara Bank Office, Opposite Brahmakumariashram, Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj. (Presently Lodged In District Jail Balotra) ----Petitioner Versus Vikram Panwar S/o Manglaram, R/o Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj.. ----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 181/2026 Suresh Kumar S/o Pukhraj Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, Through His Father Pukhraj Prajapat S/o Jairuparam Prajapat, R/o Mithai Ke Box Ki Dukan, Near Sahara Bank Office, Opposite Brahmakumari Ashram, Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District
(Uploaded on 10/02/2026 at 10:23:10 AM) (Downloaded on 10/02/2026 at 08:36:25 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:6750] (2 of 3) [CRLR-178/2026]
Balotra Raj.. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail Balotra) ----Petitioner Versus Vikram Panwar S/o Manglaram, R/o Balotra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Balotra Raj.. ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Veer Bajrang Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Harshit Chhangani Mr. Hanuman Singh Mr. Bhuvnesh Chhangani
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order 05/02/2026
1. Four different cases were lodged between the same parties.
The complainant initiated prosecutions which were registered as
four criminal regular cases and trial of each of the four cases were
held separately and decided by separate judgments.
2. The petitioner was tried for committing an offence under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, "NI Act")
and, after a full-fledged trial, was acquitted of the charges.
3. Aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the complainant
preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned
Sessions Judge, in appeal, converted the judgment of acquittal
dated 23.09.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, into a judgment of conviction vide order dated
30.01.2026. Hence, these present revision petitions.
5. Subsequently, the parties amicably settled the dispute and
entered into a compromise. A compromise deed to this effect has
been produced before this Court. In terms of the compromise, the
dispute stands permanently resolved.
(Uploaded on 10/02/2026 at 10:23:10 AM) (Downloaded on 10/02/2026 at 08:36:25 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:6750] (3 of 3) [CRLR-178/2026]
6. Since the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is a
bailable and compoundable offence, therefore, in view of the
compromise, these petitions deserve to be allowed. However, as
the machinery of law and justice has been engaged in the private
dispute between the parties for nearly two decades, costs are
required to be imposed in terms of the judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs.
Sayed Babalal reported in 2010 AIR SCW 2929.
7. Accordingly, these revision petitions are partly allowed. In
view of compromise, the judgment of conviction dated 30.01.2026
passed by the learned Sessions Judge is hereby quashed and set
aside. The order of acquittal dated 23.09.2024 passed by the
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate is affirmed. The
petitioner is in jail. He shall be set free immediately in all the four
cases.
8. The parties are further directed to deposit a sum of
Rs. 10,000/- in the account of 'Aastha'. The receipt thereof shall
be sent to the learned ACJM No. 2, Balotra, within a period of 30
days. In case of non-payment, the learned trial Court shall inform
this Court accordingly.
9. In the event of non-compliance with the directions of this
Court, the order 30.01.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge
shall stand automatically rejuvenated.
10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
11. A copy of this order shall be placed separately in each file.
(FARJAND ALI),J 159,160,161&162/AnilKC/-
(Uploaded on 10/02/2026 at 10:23:10 AM) (Downloaded on 10/02/2026 at 08:36:25 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free