Geeta Ram vs Kaur Singh

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of instant petition filed under Ss. 397/401 CrPC, challenge has been laid to judgment dated 1.8.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahar, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Appeal No. 61/2019, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7.11.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ani, in Cr. Case No. 36/2017 titled Kaur Singh v. Geeta Ram, 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 the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2,75,000/- to the respondent/complainant (hereinafter, ‘complainant’).

Precisely the facts as emerge from the record are that the complainant instituted proceedings under S.138 of the Act in the competent court of law, alleging therein that in the year 2016, accused approached him during apple season for supplying apple cartons and other packaging material. He alleged that though the value of the material was assessed at Rs.1,70,000/- but the accused also borrowed Rs.50,000/- from him. He further alleged that with a view to discharge his liability, accused issued cheque bearing No.195342 dated 18.12.2016 amounting to Rs.2,20,000/ -, drawn on Punjab National Bank Branch Anni, District Kullu. However, the fact remains that the aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the account of the accused. Since despite having received legal notice, accused failed to make good the payment within stipulated time, complainant was compelled to institute proceedings under S.138 of the Act in the competent court of law. Learned trial Court, on the basis of evidence led on record by respective parties, held accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Act and convicted and sentenced him as per description given above.

Being aggrieved by the judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned trial Court, though accused preferred an appeal before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr, but the same was also dismissed on 1.8.2022. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned courts below.

Before the case at hand could be heard and decided on its merits, parties have entered into a compromise, whereby they have resolved to settle the dispute inter se them amicably. In the aforesaid background, CrMP No. 1045 of 2023 under S.482 read with S.147 of the Act, has been filed by the accused for compounding of the offence alleged to have been committed by him. It has been stated in the application that entire amount of compensation awarded by learned trial Court has been deposited with Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anni and same can be ordered to be released in favour of the complainant.

Learned counsel for the accused states that since entire amount lying deposited with learned trial Court, has been agreed to be paid in favour of the complainant, this Court, while exercising power under S.147 of the Act may order compounding of the offence.

Learned counsel for the complainant states that in case entire amount of compensation lying deposited with learned trial Court is ordered to be released in his client’s favour, his client shall have no objection for compounding of the offence. He states that since the complainant was unnecessarily dragged into litigation, this court may also award litigation cost.

Having taken note of the fact that entire amount as stands deposited with learned trial Court has been agreed to be released in favour of the complainant and complainant has no objection for compounding the offence, in case, said amount is released in his favour, this court sees no no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding of the offence while exercising power under S.147 of the Act and in terms of the guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has held that court may compound the offence in those cases also, where conviction has been recorded.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner-accused is ordered to be compounded. 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. Bail bonds furnished by the accused are discharged. Amount deposited by the complainant with the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in favour of the complainant, on his making formal applications in this regard.

Since complainant was unnecessarily dragged into litigation for realization of his money, this Court deems it fit to impost Rs.15,000/- as litigation charges, which shall be paid within four weeks, failing which the petitioner shall render himself liable for penal action as well as proceedings under Contempt of Courts Act.

The petition stands disposed of in the afore terms, alongwith all pending applications.