Anuj Sood vs Yagya Dutt Sharma And Others

Sandeep Sharma, J

Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397/ 401 of Cr.PC, lays challenge to judgment dated 29.8.2019, passed by the learned Sessions

Judge, Sirmour District at Nahan, HP, in Criminal Appeal No. 84-Cr.A/10 of 2018, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

5.9.2018, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajgarh, District Sirmour, H.P., in Criminal Complaint No. 75/3 of 2016, whereby the

learned trial Court while holding the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act (in short the “Act""), convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and pay compensation to the tune

of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the complainant.

Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent-complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in

the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sirmour, alleging therein that complainant-respondent on the request of accused, who had friendly

relations with him, advanced sum of Rs. 1,70,000/- to the accused on 20.2.2016 at Rajgarh. Accused with a view to discharge his liability, issued

cheque in his favour, but fact remains that aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured. Since petitioner-accused failed to make the payment

good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, respondent/complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings before the competent Court of law

under Section 138 of the Act.

Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment dated 5.9.2018, held the petitioner-accused

guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, sentenced him as per the description given herein above.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the court below, accused preferred an appeal in the court of

learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 29.8.2019, as a consequence of which,

judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present petitioner-accused has approached

this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below.

Vide order dated 7.11.2019, this Court, while suspending the substantive sentence imposed by the court below, directed the accused to deposit the

compensation amount, within a period of six weeks. Accused has already deposited sum of Rs. 60,000/- in the learned trial court, but before matter

could be heard and decided on its own merits, parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicable inter-se them, whereby entire sum of Rs.

2,00,000/- as has been awarded by the learned trial court, has been agreed to be paid by the accused to the respondent - complainant.

Today, during the proceedings of the case, Mr. N.K. Tomar learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, states that sum of Rs. 1,40,000/- has been

already paid to the respondent-complainant and sum of Rs. 60,000/-, which is lying deposited before the learned trial court, has been agreed to be

released in favour of the complainant. He states that since entire amount of compensation i.e. Rs.2,00,000/-, now stands paid or agreed to be paid to

the complainant, this Court while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, may proceed to compound the offence and acquit the petitioner of

the charges framed against him.

Mr. Munish Datwalia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-complainant while fairly admitting factum with regard to receipt of Rs.

1,40,000/-states that in case amount lying deposited with the Registry of this court as well as the court below, is ordered to be released in favour of the

complainant, he shall have no objection in case prayer made in the instant petition for compounding offence is accepted.

Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of compensation stands paid or agreed to be paid to the respondent-complainant and respondent

has no objection in compounding the offence, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for compounding

of offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Damodar S.

Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, wherein it has been 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.

Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 29.

8.2019 and 5.9.2018, passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him

under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, discharged. Court below is directed to release the amount i.e. Rs.

60,000/- deposited by the accused in the instant case, in favour of the complainant by remitting the same in his saving bank account, detail whereof

shall be furnished by the learned counsel for the complainant, within ten days. Since respondent-complainant was unnecessarily dragged to institute the

legal proceedings against the accused that too for realization of his own money, this court deems it fit to direct the accused to pay sum of Rs. 10,000/-

to the respondent as litigation cost, payable within three weeks. Ordered accordingly. It is made clear that in case, aforesaid amount of Rs. 10,000/- is

not paid within the time stipulated by this court, accused besides rendering himself liable for penal consequences would also invite contempt

proceedings. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.