9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 744X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... light of the compromise Petition filed before this Court, enumerating the terms of consent and the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the parties that the settlement was arrived at between the parties without duress on either party from any quarter, the compromise Petition is accepted and taken on record. The compounding of the offence is allowed. The order of conviction handed out to the Petitioners is set aside. The Petitioners are consequently acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners submits that in terms of the Order of this Court, dated 24-10-2019, an amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only, had been deposited before the Learned Trial Court. That, in view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 31-03-2023, be accepted and the Petitioners be acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act that they have been convicted under. 3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent, in agreement with Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners, advanced the submission that the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 has propounded inter alia that an application for compounding of offences may be allowed even by the Sessions Court or the High Court, at any stage. That, the said ratio therefore permits the parties to compound the offence. 4. The genesis of the dispute is the Complaint filed by the Respondent/Complainant, under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the NI Act on 08-02-2016, before the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nter alia held that there was no need to interfere with the Judgment of the Learned Trial Court and dismissed the Appeal. Hence, the instant Revision Petition. 5. Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties, relevant reference is made to Damodar S. Prabhu (supra), wherein the Supreme Court held as follows; 12. Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is in the nature of an enabling provision which provides for the compounding of offences prescribed under the same Act, thereby serving as an exception to the general rule incorporated in sub-section (9) of Section 320 CrPC which states that No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this section . A bare reading of this provision would lead us to the inference th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as K.M. Ibrahim v. K.P. Mohammed [(2010) 1 SCC 798 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 921 : (2009) 14 Scale 262] wherein Kabir, J. has noted (at SCC p. 802, paras 13-14): 13. As far as the non obstante clause included in Section 147 of the 1881 Act is concerned, the 1881 Act being a special statute, the provisions of Section 147 will have an overriding effect over the provisions of the Code relating to compounding of offences. 14. 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 stag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned Order of stay was subject to deposit of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only, by the Petitioners before the Learned Trial Court. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners submits that in terms of the Order of this Court, dated 24-10-2019, an amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only, had been deposited before the Learned Trial Court. That, in view of the compromise arrived at by the parties, and as agreed to by the parties before this Court today, the Petitioners be permitted to withdraw the deposited amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only. 8. In view of the foregoing discussions, the prayer of Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners is allowed. He is permitted to withdraw the amount of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
