9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M/S. METERS AND INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED ANR. VERSUS KANCHAN MEHTA [ 2017 (10) TMI 218 - SUPREME COURT ], whereby it has been observed by the Supreme Court that though the compounding of offence requires consent of both the parties, even in absence of such consent, the Court, in the interest of justice, on being satisfied that the complainant has been duly compensated, can in its discretion close the proceedings and discharge the accused. In the present case, though the respondent no.2 was convicted by the Trial Court, the Appellate Court acquitted him considering the fact that the respondent no.2 had deposited 2,00,000/ towards compensation alongwith interest and cost, which was four ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de the judgment and order dated 23.02.2015 convicted the respondent no.2accused for the offence under section 138 of the said Act and directed him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of ₹ 5,000/, and in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and also to pay compensation of ₹ 1,00,000/ to the complainant. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by the Trial Court, the present appellant had preferred the Criminal Revision No.7 of 2015 seeking enhancement of sentence and quantum of compensation, whereas respondent no.2accused had preferred the Criminal Appeal No.2 of 2015 challenging his conviction for the offence under sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount to be paid to the complainant. According to him, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kanchan Mehta, reported in (2018) 1 SCC 560, the amount of compensation being more than adequate, the Appellate Court has rightly acquitted respondent no.2. 5. At the outset, it may be stated that there are certain facts which have not been disputed by either of the parties, like that the respondent no.2 had sent a demand draft of ₹ 50,000/ to the complainant during pendency of trial towards dishonoured cheque in question of ₹ 50,000/, which demand draft was refused by the complainant. It is also not disputed that respondent no.2 thereafter during pendency of appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is paid and if there is no reason to proceed with the punitive aspect. ii) The object of the provision being primarily compensatory, punitive element being mainly with the object of enforcing the compensatory element, compounding at the initial stage has to be encouraged but is not debarred at later stage subject to appropriate compensation as may be found acceptable to the parties or the Court. iii) Though compounding requires consent of both parties, even in absence of such consent, the Court, in the interests of justice, on being satisfied that the complainant has been duly compensated, can in its discretion close the proceedings and discharge the accused. iv) Procedure for trial of cases under Chapter XVII of the Act has normall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , though the respondent no.2 was convicted by the Trial Court, the Appellate Court acquitted him considering the fact that the respondent no.2 had deposited ₹ 2,00,000/ towards compensation alongwith interest and cost, which was four times amount of cheque in question, and therefore, it could be said that the complainant was fully compensated, applying the principle laid down in case of Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). Thus, the impugned order passed by the Appellate Court being discretionary in nature following the judgment of Supreme Court, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said impugned order passed by the Appellate Court. 8. In that view of the matter, present appeal being devoid of merits deserves to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
