2021 (11) TMI 985 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - seeking exemption of compounding fee on the ground that due to poor financial condition, petitioner could not pay the amount well in time and now he is not in a position to pay the compounding fee - HELD THAT - Instead of 15% of the cheque amount, petitioner/accused is directed to deposit ₹ 5,000/- as compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla within four weeks from today - After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shall place a copy of receipt of deposit of compounding fee on record of this petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with the H.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla within eight weeks from today, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically revive. As an amount of ₹ 1,76,000/- has been deposited by petitioner in the Registry of this court, therefore, Registry of this Court is directed to release the said amount, along with interest, if any, to the respondent No. 1/complainant Birendra Bahadur Singh, by remitting the same in his bank account to be supplied by the respondent in person or through his counsel ₹ 44,000/- has been deposited by the petitioner in the Trial Court, therefore, the Trial Court is also directed to release the amount of compensation, deposited by the petitioner/accused in favour of respondent No. 1/complainant Birendra Bahadur Singh, along with interest, if any accrued thereon, without issuing notice to the accused-petitioner (Inderjeet Sedha) by remitting the same in his bank account, details whereof shall be furnished by him either in person or through counsel at the time of production of copy of this order in the trial Court. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against conviction and sentencing under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Compromise agreement between the parties.
3. Exemption from payment of compounding fee.
4. Directions for depositing compounding fee.
5. Release of deposited amounts to the complainant.
6. Disposal of the petition and related applications.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to a revision petition challenging the conviction and sentencing of the petitioner-accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Additional Sessions Judge affirmed the judgment of the Judicial Magistrate, convicting the petitioner-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and pay compensation of Rs. 2,20,000 to the complainant. The petitioner sought to compromise the matter, leading to subsequent developments.

2. Both parties, through their respective counsels, expressed their willingness to withdraw the complaint and compromise the case. The petitioner agreed to release the deposited compensation amount and requested exemption from paying the compounding fee due to financial constraints. The respondent was ready to withdraw the complaint upon receiving the entire amount in his favor, with a prayer for additional compensation, which was not granted by the Court.

3. The Court considered the request for exemption from the compounding fee in light of the petitioner's financial situation and legal precedents. Instead of the usual 15% of the cheque amount, the petitioner was directed to deposit Rs. 5,000 as the compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority within a specified timeframe, failing which the original conviction and sentence would be reinstated automatically.

4. The judgment further directed the release of the deposited amounts by the petitioner, totaling Rs. 2,20,000, to the complainant. The Registry of the High Court and the Trial Court were instructed to remit the amounts along with any accrued interest to the complainant's bank account without further notice to the accused-petitioner.

5. Finally, the petition was disposed of in accordance with the terms outlined in the judgment, with directions for sending a copy to the H.P. State Legal Services Authority. The parties were permitted to use downloaded copies from the High Court website for various purposes, and concerned authorities were instructed not to insist on certified copies, with verification available on the High Court website.