2021 (10) TMI 692 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - conviction and sentence recorded by the courts - compounding of offences - section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT - Reliance placed in the case of K.M. Ibrahim vs. K.P. Mohammed and Another 2009 (12) TMI 903 - SUPREME COURT where it was held that It is true that the application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was made by the parties after the proceedings had been concluded before the Appellate Forum. However, Section 147 of the aforesaid Act does not bar the parties from compounding an offence under Section 138 even at the appellate stage of the proceedings. Accordingly, we find no reason to reject the application under Section 147 of the aforesaid Act even in a proceeding under Article 136 of the Constitution. Keeping in view that in the present case, the parties have settled their disputes, this Court finds it appropriate to allow the application and permit the parties to compound the offence - the judgment of the Courts below is set aside, the offence for which the revisionist was tried and convicted has been compounded and the accused/revisionist is acquitted of all the charges levelled against him - revision allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Compounding of offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act at the appellate stage.

Analysis:

1. Background and Conviction:
The case involved a revision petition challenging the judgment convicting the revisionist under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The revisionist had purchased gold bangles on credit, issued a cheque that was dishonored, and subsequently faced legal proceedings resulting in a conviction by the trial court. The appeal against this conviction was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge.

2. Compounding Application:
During the revision, a joint application was filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act seeking to compound the offense and permit a compromise between the parties. The application stated that a compromise had been reached, the entire compensation amount was paid, and the complainant no longer wished to prosecute the case.

3. Legal Arguments and Precedent:
The revisionist's counsel argued that the conviction should be set aside in light of Section 147 of the Act, which allows for compounding of offenses even at the appellate stage. Citing the case of K.M. Ibrahim vs. K.P. Mohammed, where it was held that parties can compound an offense under Section 138 even during appellate proceedings, the counsel sought acquittal based on the settlement between the parties.

4. Court's Decision:
After hearing both parties and considering the compounding application and relevant legal provisions, the Court allowed the application under Section 147. Citing the Supreme Court precedent and the settlement between the parties, the Court set aside the judgments of the lower courts, compounded the offense, and acquitted the revisionist of all charges.

5. Conclusion:
The Court, in line with the spirit of Section 147 and the settlement between the parties, allowed the compounding of the offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Consequently, the revision petition was allowed, the judgments of the lower courts were set aside, and the revisionist was acquitted of the charges against him.