Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2021 (1) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (1) TMI 566 - HC - Indian Laws


Issues:
Appeal against judgment and order of acquittal under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure arising from a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis:
The appellant, the original complainant, filed a complaint against the respondent, the original accused, for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Trial Court convicted the respondent, directing imprisonment and compensation. The respondent appealed, depositing a significant amount towards compensation pending the appeal, leading to acquittal by the Appellate Court. The appellant appealed against this judgment.

The appellant argued that the Appellate Court misinterpreted evidence and solely relied on the deposited amount by the respondent. The respondent's counsel highlighted the respondent's actions of sending a demand draft and subsequent deposit, emphasizing the adequacy of the compensation deposited, citing a Supreme Court decision.

The Court noted undisputed facts of the demand draft sent by the respondent and the subsequent deposit made pending the appeal. Referring to the Supreme Court decision in Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd. case, the Court discussed the principles related to the compounding of the offence under section 138 of the Act, emphasizing the compensatory nature of the provision and the discretion of the Court to discharge the accused if the complainant is duly compensated.

Considering the facts of the case, the Court observed that the respondent's deposit was four times the amount of the cheque in question, leading to full compensation for the complainant. The Court held that the Appellate Court's decision was discretionary, following the Supreme Court's judgment, and declined to interfere with it, ultimately dismissing the present appeal for lack of merits.

Therefore, the appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arising from a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, was dismissed by the Court based on the principles of compensation and the discretion of the Appellate Court in light of the Supreme Court's decision.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates