Chaman Lal vs Ganga Ram

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of instant application filed under S.5 of Limitation Act, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the accompanying criminal revision petition, which is barred by limitation.

Pursuant to notice issued in the instant proceedings, Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent. He states that he does not intend to file reply to the application and has no objection in case, prayer made in the application for condonation of delay is accepted and criminal revision petition is decided on its own merit.

Having taken note of fair stand of learned counsel for the respondent and averments contained in the application, this court finds that delay in filing the accompanying criminal revision petition is neither intentional nor willful, rather owing to the circumstances, which were completely beyond the control of the applicant, as such, delay of 244 days, which otherwise stands sufficiently explained, is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Application stands disposed of. Criminal revision petition be registered.

Cr. Revision No. 718 of 2022

By way of instant criminal revision petition filed under Ss. 397/401 CrPC, challenge has been laid to judgment dated 10.3.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Appeal No. 12 of 2021, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5.10.2021 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Complaint No. 2222/2013 (977 of 2013) titled Ganga Ram. v. Chaman Lal, whereby learned trial Court, while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter, ‘Act;) convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 18 months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs..6.00 Lakh to the respondent/complainant (hereinafter, ‘complainant’).

Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record, are that the complainant instituted proceedings under S.138 of the Act in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kullu, District Kullu, alleging therein that he had advanced Rs.3.50 Lakh as loan to the accused on his request. He alleged that. with a view to discharge his liability, accused issued cheque bearing No. 001014 dated 5.4.2011 in the sum of Rs.3.50 Lakh drawn at Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Limited Manali, but the fact remains that the aforesaid cheque, on its presentation, was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. Since, despite having received legal notice, accused failed to make payment of cheque amount, within the time stipulated in the legal notice, complainant was compelled to institute proceedings under S. 138 of the Act.

Learned trial Court, on the basis of evidence adduced on record by respective parties,, held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of Act and convicted and sentenced him as per description given herein above, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5.10.2021

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned trial Court, accused preferred an appeal before learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, but the same was also dismissed vide judgment dated 10.3.2022. In the aforesaid background, accused has approached this court, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside judgments of conviction and order of sentence recoded by learned courts below.

Before the case at hand, could be heard and decided on merit, petitioner filed CrMP No. 4067 of 2022, under S.147 of the Act praying therein to compound the offence in view of compromise arrived inter se parties.

Apart from above, record reveals that, while filing revision, accused also placed on record compromise arrived at between the parties, after recoding of judgments of conviction and order of sentence by learned courts below. Since there was delay in maintaining the criminal revision petition, this court at first instance, ordered issuance of notice on delay application on 19.12.2022. On 26.12.2022, Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate put in appearance on behalf of the respondent and fairly acknowledged the factum with regard to compromise arrived inter se parties. On that day, complainant Ganga Ram, also came present in the court and stated before this court on oath that he of his volition and without there being any external pressure has entered into compromise with the accused and has received Rs.2.00 Lakh from the accused as full and final settlement. Respondent further stated that on account of settlement arrived inter se them, he intends to withdraw from prosecution and shall have no objection in case conviction of petitioner is set aside. His statement recorded on 26.12.2022 is on record.

In the aforesaid background, learned counsel for the petitioner states that since the parties have resolved to settle the dispute inter se them amicably and in terms of compromise, Rs.2.00 Lakh has been received by complainant,, this court while exercising power under S. 147 of the Act and guidelines framed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, may proceed to compound the offence and acquit the accused of the charge framed against him under S.138 of the Act.

While fairly acknowledging the factum with regard to amicable settlement arrived inter se parties, learned counsel for the complainant states that since Rs. 2.00 Lakh has been received by the complainant, he shall have no objection, in case prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding of offence is accepted.

Having taken note of the fact that the parties have resolved to settle the dispute inter se them amicably and in terms of compromise, Rs.2.00 Lakh stands received by the complainant, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding of offence, while exercising power under S.147 of the Act and guidelines framed in Damodar S. Prabhu, supra, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has held that prayer for compounding of the offence, can be accepted even after recording of conviction.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned courts below are quashed and set aside and accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him. Since the accused is in jail, Registry is directed to prepare and send the release warrants of the accused forthwith, to the Superintendent of Jail, Model Central Jail, Nahan, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, via email/fax.