9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 557 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - compounding of offences - amicable settlement of disputes - Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act - HELD THAT - Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act provides that every offence punishable under the Act shall be compoundable notwithstanding any provision under the Code of Criminal Procedure. This obviously would have reference to section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides that certain offences enumerated thereunder are compoundable at the instance of the person who has suffered the harm. In VINAY DEVANNA NAYAK VERSUS RYOT SEVA SAHAKARI BANK LTD 2007 (12) TMI 444 - SUPREME COURT the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the parliamentary intention under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act appears to be that normally compounding of offences under the Act should not be denied - In KM. IBRAHIM VERSUS KP. MOHAMMED ANR. 2009 (12) TMI 903 - SUPREME COURT the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act shall have overriding effect over any other provision under the general laws. In view of the settlement between the parties, the prayer for compounding the offence under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is granted - revision allowed.
Issues:
1. Criminal revision petition against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2011. 2. Compromise agreement between the parties. 3. Application of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 4. Effect of settlement on the judgment of conviction and sentence. Analysis: 1. The criminal revision petition was filed against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2011, affirming the conviction and sentence of RI for one year under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioners sought to set aside this judgment based on a compromise agreement between the parties, which was supported by a joint compromise agreement and supplementary affidavit. 2. The petitioners contended that they had already paid a sum of Rs. 40,000 to the complainant, leading to the institution of a police case. Relying on the judgment in "Gian Singh v. State of Punjab," the petitioners argued that the judgment of conviction and sentence should be set aside due to the compromise between the parties, emphasizing the importance of settling disputes amicably. 3. The court considered the provisions of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, which state that every offence under the Act shall be compoundable, overriding any provision under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Referring to previous judgments, including "Vinay Devanna Nayak v. Ryot Sewa Sahakari Bank Ltd." and "K. M. Ibrahim v. K.P. Mohammed," the court highlighted the legislative intent that compounding of offences under the Act should not be denied. 4. Citing the Supreme Court's observations, the court emphasized that the object of Section 320 CrPC, though not directly applicable to proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, aligns with the intention behind Section 147. The court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to pass appropriate orders in line with the provisions of Section 320 CrPC, ensuring justice to the parties involved. Ultimately, considering the settlement between the parties, the court granted the prayer for compounding the offence under Section 147 and set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence of RI for one year. Criminal Revision No. 721 of 2015 was allowed, concluding the matter.
|
