9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 348 - HC - Indian LawsDishonour of Cheque - insufficient funds - compounding of offence - HELD THAT - Having taken note of the fact that the entire amount of compensation i.e. Rs.45, 000/- as awarded by the learned Trial Court has been received by the complainant-respondent and the complainant has no objection in compounding the offence therefore this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused-petitioner for compounding of offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon ble Apex Court in DAMODAR S. PRABHU VERSUS SAYED BABALAL H. 2010 (5) TMI 380 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has held that Any costs imposed in accordance with these guidelines should be deposited with the Legal Services Authority operating at the level of the Court before which compounding takes place. For instance in case of compounding during the pendency of proceedings before a Magistrate s Court or a Court of Sessions such costs should be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority. In K. SUBRAMANIAN VERSUS R. RAJATHI REP. BY P.O.A.P. KALIAPPAN 2009 (11) TMI 1013 - SUPREME COURT it has been held by the Hon ble Apex Court that in view of the provisions contained in Section 147 of the Act read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C. compromise arrived at can be accepted even after recording of the judgment of conviction. Since in the instant case the petitioner-accused after being convicted under Section 138 of the Act has already paid the entire amount of compensation to the complainant-respondent prayer for compounding the offence can be accepted in terms of the aforesaid judgments passed by the Hon ble Apex Court - the parties are permitted to get the matter compounded in light of the compromise arrived inter se them. The compounding fee in the sum of Rs.2250/- has already been deposited by the petitioner before H.P. State Legal Services Authority as per the directions of this Court. The present matter is ordered to be compounded and the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.09.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Court No. 2 Paonta Sahib District Sirmaur H.P. is quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Bail bonds if any stand discharged - Petition disposed off.
Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the issue of compounding of the offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Summary: The petitioner-accused filed a petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against a judgment convicting him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused had borrowed money from the complainant and issued a post-dated check that was dishonored. After a legal notice and trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and compensation. The accused appealed, but the lower court upheld the judgment. During the petition, the complainant and accused reached a settlement, with the complainant receiving the compensation amount. The complainant expressed no objection to quashing the conviction and setting aside the sentence, leading to the petition for compounding the offense. Detailed Judgment: The petitioner sought permission to compound the offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant confirmed receiving the compensation amount and expressed no objection to quashing the conviction and setting aside the sentence. The court considered the provisions of Section 147 of the Act and relevant Supreme Court judgments, highlighting that offenses under this Act are compoundable. The court referred to precedents indicating that compromises can be accepted even after the recording of a judgment of conviction. Since the accused had paid the compensation amount, the court accepted the prayer for compounding the offense. Conclusion: The court permitted the parties to compound the matter based on the compromise reached between them. The compounding fee was deposited as directed. Consequently, the judgment of conviction and sentence were quashed and set aside, and the petitioner-accused was acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Act. Bail bonds, if any, were discharged. The petition and any pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
|
