Ankit Kumar vs Shalinder Rana

Sandeep Sharma, J

Instant Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to judgment dated 23.7.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No.2-P/X/2014, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 16.1.2014 and order of sentence dated 18.1.2014, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., in criminal complaint No.187-III/11/2013, whereby learned court below while holding petitioner-accused guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant.

Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ( for short Act) before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., alleging therein that the accused, who is running construction business in the vicinity of Palampur purchased wood used for construction of different types of building from him and as such, owe sum of Rs. 30,057/-. Complainant alleged that accused with a view to discharge his aforesaid liability, issued cheque bearing No.393017, dated 20.5.2019, amounting to Rs. 14,000/- drawn in the State Bank of India, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., towards part payment of aforesaid amount, but fact remains that aforesaid cheque was dishonoured on its presentation on account of insufficient funds in the account of the accused. Since, the accused failed to make the payment good despite having received statutory notice, complainant was compelled to initiation proceedings under Section 138 of the Act, in the appropriate Court of law.

Learned trial Court on the basis of the evidence adduced on record by the respective parties held accused guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as per the description given hereinabove. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned trial Court, petitioner- accused preferred an appeal in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., which came to be registered as Criminal Appeal No.2-P/X/2014, however fact remains that same was dismissed, as a result of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid backdrop, accused approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside the judgment of conviction recorded by learned trial Court.

Vide order dated 13.01.2020, this Court suspended the substantive sentence imposed by learned court below subject to deposit of entire balance compensation amount within a period of four weeks. However, 29.10.2020, learned counsel representing the petitioner stated before this Court that entire amount of compensation stands deposited in the trial Court and petitioner shall have no objection in case aforesaid amount is ordered to be released in favour of the complainant. Aforesaid counsel further stated before this Court that since petitioner is ready and willing to settle the matter amicably, an application under Section 147 Cr.P.C is being filed, praying therein to compound the offence alleged to have been committed by him under Section 138 of the Act. Having heard aforesaid statement made on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Mukul Sood, learned counsel representing the respondent/ complainant sought time to have instructions.

Today, during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the complainant on instructions stated before this Court that since complainant was unnecessarily dragged into the litigation for realization of his own money, respondent-complainant is not ready for amicable settlement.

Since both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably interse them and the petitioner-accused is ready and willing to pay the entire compensation amount awarded by the learned trial Court, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer for compounding the offence while exercising power under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu case, has categorically held that Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction by the courts below

Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid discussion made hereinabove, instant matter is ordered to be compounded and judgments passed by learned Courts below are quashed and set-aside. The petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. The bail bonds of the accused are ordered to be discharged. However, present petitioner-accused is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the respondent-complainant on account of litigation charges within a period of seeks weeks from today, failing which, he shall render himself liable for penal consequences as well as proceedings under Contempt of Court.

Learned trial Court below is directed to release the amount deposited by the petitioner-accused in favour of the complainant forthwith, on his making application.

The petition is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.