9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C.? This interesting question arises for consideration in this revision petition, which is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In the nature of the contentions raised before me, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any detail. Signatur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of compensation of the actual cheque amount of Rs. 10,752/-. Separate default sentences were imposed for the fine amount as well as the compensation amount. 3. Obviously, the learned Sessions Judge has not appreciated the provisions of Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. I extract below Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. Section 357(3): When a Court imposes a sentence, of which fine does not form a part the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been considered by the learned Sessions Judge. I am satisfied that the said challenge raised in this revision must hence succeed to that extent. 5. I do further note that in this case trial was held before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate who in law is competent to impose any sentence of fine authorised by law. Therefore the sentence of imprisonment till rising of court can also be avoided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the courts below, he is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months. If realised the entire amount shall be released to the complainant under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. The petitioner shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
