9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 1100 - HC - Indian LawsDishonour of Cheque - insufficient funds - settlement of matter between parties - compounding of offences - HELD THAT - Having taken note of the fact that the petitioner-accused and the complainant-respondent have settled the matter 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 Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is in the nature of an enabling provision which provides for the compounding of offences prescribed under the same Act, thereby serving as an exception to the general rule incorporated in sub-section (9) of Section 320 of the CrPC which states that 'No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this Section'. A bare reading of this provision would lead us to the inference that offences punishable under laws other than the Indian Penal Code also cannot be compounded. However, since Section 147 was inserted by way of an amendment to a special law, the same will override the effect of Section 320(9) of the CrPC, especially keeping in mind that Section 147 carries a non obstante clause. 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 compromised the matter with the complainant, prayer for compounding the offence can be accepted in terms of the aforesaid judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The present matter is ordered to be compounded and the impugned judgment of conviction, dated 12.06.2018, and order of sentence dated 11.09.2018, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Kangra, H.P., is quashed and set-aside - 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:
The petition filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against judgment dated 14.12.2022 affirming conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Summary: The petitioner-accused purchased equipment from the complainant and issued a cheque that was dishonored due to insufficient funds. The complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, leading to the petitioner's conviction and sentence by the Trial Court. The petitioner's appeal was dismissed, prompting the current petition seeking acquittal. A joint application was filed by both parties to compound the offence during the pendency of the petition. The complainant stated his willingness to compound the offence and not pursue the complaint further due to a compromise with the petitioner-accused. After hearing both parties, the Court accepted the prayer for compounding the offence under Section 147 of the NI Act, citing relevant legal provisions and guidelines from previous judgments. The Court referred to the enabling provision in Section 147 of the NI Act, which allows for compounding of offences under the Act, overriding the general rule in Section 320 of the CrPC. It highlighted the importance of the compromise between parties even after the recording of the judgment of conviction, as established in previous legal precedents. Considering the detailed discussion and legal precedents, the Court allowed the application for compounding the offence, quashing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence. The petitioner-accused was acquitted, and any deposited amount was directed to be released to the complainant after verification. Acknowledging the petitioner's financial condition, a token compounding fee of Rs. 10,000 was imposed by the Court, payable to the District Legal Services Authority within four weeks. The petition was disposed of accordingly, along with any pending miscellaneous applications.
|
