9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1302 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - Closure of proceedings - Section 138 of NI Act - whether a compromise, at this stage, can be permitted to be effected between the parties where the petitioner has been charged under Section 138 of the Act? Held that - This Court after being satisfied that the cheque amount with the assessed cost and interest has been paid, can close the proceedings even in absence of the complainant. Since, the petitioner has paid the entire compensation amount, therefore, quashing of the complaint initiated at the instance of complainant/respondent No.1 would be a step towards securing the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of the Court, especially, when the petitioner is facing pangs and suffered agony of protracted trial and thereafter appeal/revision for the last seven years and has paid the entire compensation amount. This is a fit case to exercise the powers not only under Sections 397, 401 and Section 482 of the Code, but even under Section 147 of the Act - the impugned substantive sentence of simple imprisonment imposed in this case shall stand modified and substituted in lieu of the compensation amount of ₹ 5,50,000/- that stands already paid/deposited by the petitioner - petition disposed off.
Issues Involved:
1. Conviction and sentencing under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. Permissibility of compromise at a later stage of proceedings. 3. Exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 4. Application of recent judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding quashing of criminal proceedings. 5. Interpretation of the nature of offense under Section 138 of the Act. Issue 1: Conviction and Sentencing under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act: The complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Act against the petitioner for dishonor of a cheque worth ?5,00,000. The trial magistrate convicted the petitioner, sentencing him to six months of simple imprisonment and ordering compensation of ?5,50,000. The petitioner's appeal was dismissed, leading to a revision petition. Issue 2: Permissibility of Compromise at a Later Stage of Proceedings: The petitioner had paid a significant portion of the compensation amount and further deposited the remaining sum in court. The question arose whether a compromise could be allowed at this stage, especially considering the charges under Section 138 of the Act. The court noted the power to accept settlements under Section 147 of the Act and highlighted the need to prevent abuse of court processes. Issue 3: Exercise of Inherent Powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code: The court discussed the inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of court processes and secure justice. Emphasizing the need for circumspection, the court referred to a Supreme Court decision outlining principles for exercising such powers, particularly in cases involving serious offenses. Issue 4: Application of Recent Judgments Regarding Quashing of Criminal Proceedings: The court cited recent Supreme Court judgments, including Parbatbhai Aahir, Kanchan Mehta, Bhangu Trading Co., and N.P. Murugesan cases, to guide the decision-making process. These judgments emphasized the importance of evaluating each case's facts and circumstances, especially in determining whether to quash criminal proceedings based on settlements between parties. Issue 5: Interpretation of the Nature of Offense under Section 138 of the Act: The court referred to the Supreme Court's observations regarding Section 138 of the Act as primarily a civil wrong with a compensatory objective. The court highlighted the need for summary trials and encouraged compounding at the initial stage, subject to appropriate compensation. The judgment underscored the importance of balancing compensatory and punitive elements in such cases. In conclusion, the court exercised its powers under Sections 397, 401, and 482 of the Cr.P.C., as well as Section 147 of the Act, to modify the petitioner's sentence to the compensation amount already paid. The deposited amount was ordered to be released to the complainant, bringing the matter to a close after a prolonged legal battle.
|
