2021 (5) TMI 769 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of accused - Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - HELD THAT - The parties have settled their dispute(s) by way of the compromise dated 23.01.2019, coupled with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in MADHYA PRADESH STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY VERSUS PRATEEK JAIN ANOTHER 2014 (10) TMI 528 - SUPREME COURT and keeping in view the specific/special reasons, this Court deviates from the conditions laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in DAMODAR S. PRABHU VERSUS SAYED BABALAL H. 2010 (5) TMI 380 - SUPREME COURT and grants permission to the parties to compound the offence punishable under Section 138 N.I. Act. The impugned judgment dated 30.07.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula, and the judgment of conviction dated 28.04.2016 and the order of sentence dated 29.04.2016, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula, are set aside. The complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act. is dismissed and the petitioner is acquitted of the notice(s) of accusation served upon him. The complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act. is dismissed and the petitioner is acquitted of the notice(s) of accusation served upon him - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
- Compromise between parties during the pendency of the petition
- Request for compounding the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act
- Imposition of costs in terms of the judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu's case
- Waiver of costs due to settlement between parties
- Legal principles regarding waiver/reduction of costs in criminal cases

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal against conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula, with a sentence of imprisonment for one year and a fine to be paid as compensation. The appeal against this judgment was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula. Subsequently, a compromise was reached between the parties during the pendency of the petition, where the petitioner agreed to repay the entire amount to the complainant in installments. A petition was filed for compounding the offence in view of this settlement, which was not disputed by the respondent's counsel.

Regarding the imposition of costs in terms of the judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu's case, the petitioner argued that due to the settlement and exhaustion of resources to pay the settlement amount, the costs should be waived off. The respondent's counsel did not object to this request. The court referred to legal principles established in previous judgments, including the need for parties to make a plausible case for the waiver or reduction of costs. The court also considered the specific circumstances of the case, where the complainant accepted the settled amount and was willing to forego the costs.

Based on the settlement between the parties, the court granted permission to compound the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act. The impugned judgments and orders were set aside, and the petitioner was acquitted of the accusations. The court deviated from the conditions laid down in previous judgments regarding the imposition of costs and released the petitioner from custody. The case was disposed of in accordance with the settlement and legal principles discussed during the proceedings.