$~56 & 57
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.REV.P. 485/2023 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 617/2023
SADASHIV SHINDE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ravinder Tyagi, Adv.
with petitioner in person
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
AND ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for
the State
Respondent No. 2 in
person
+ CRL.REV.P. 486/2023 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 618/2023
SADASHIV SHINDE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ravinder Tyagi, Adv.
with petitioner in person
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
AND ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for
the State
Respondent No. 2 in
person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
O R D E R
% 31.01.2024
inter alia
1. The present petitions are filed, , challenging the
common judgment dated 20.04.2023 (hereafter ‘impugned
judgment’), passed by the learned ASJ-03, Central District, Tis
Hazari Courts, Delhi in Criminal Appeal Nos. 255/2022 and
254/2022.
This is a digitally signed order.
CRL.REV.P. 485/2023 Page 1 of 3
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/07/2024 at 14:14:25
2. The learned ASJ, by the impugned judgment, upheld the
orders of conviction dated 19.10.2022 and the orders on sentence
dated 20.10.2022, passed by the learned MM-01 (NI Act),
Digital Courts, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, in Complaint
Case Nos. 4075/2021 and 4073/2021 respectively, and enhanced
the sentence of the petitioner to one year of simple imprisonment
in both the complaint cases, increasing the fine to ₹50,02,368/-,
payable to the respondent as compensation, and in default of the
fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one
year. The sentence of imprisonment was to run concurrently.
3. By the orders of conviction dated 19.10.2022, the learned
MM convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
4. Subsequently, the learned MM, by the orders on sentence
dated 20.10.2022, sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple
imprisonment for 3 months and to pay fine of ₹18,80,000/-
respectively, payable to the respondent as compensation, and in
default of the fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of one month.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
parties have settled their disputes. He submits that Respondent
No.2 has already received the settlement amount, and has no
objection if the impugned order is set aside.
6. Respondent No.2 is present in person. He agrees that the
parties have settled their disputes and that he has received the
settlement amount in his bank account. He states that he does not
wish to pursue the proceedings emanating out of Complaint Case
Nos. 4075/2021 and 4073/2021.
7. In view of the above, the present petitions are allowed and
the impugned judgment dated 20.04.2023, the orders of
This is a digitally signed order.
CRL.REV.P. 485/2023 Page 2 of 3
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/07/2024 at 14:14:25
conviction dated 19.10.2022 as well as the orders on sentence
dated 20.10.2022, passed in Complaint Case Nos. 4075/2021 and
4073/2021 respectively, are set aside.
8. A copy of this order be placed in both the petitions.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J
JANUARY 31, 2024
(cid:147)SS(cid:148)
This is a digitally signed order.
CRL.REV.P. 485/2023 Page 3 of 3
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/07/2024 at 14:14:25