Hardeep Thakur vs Ravina Devi

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 9.1.2020, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Shimla, camp at Rohru, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No.17-

R/10 of 2018, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 2.11.2018, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Court No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., in case No.135-3 of 2017, 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. 1,00,000/- to the complainant in lieu of dishonoured cheque.

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, Court

No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., alleging therein that during the apple season in the year 2017, accused purchased 112 apple boxes from her for

consideration of Rs. 84,000/-. Complainant alleged that accused with a view to discharge his aforesaid liability, issued cheque bearing No.897656,

dated 20.9.2017, amounting to Rs. 84,000/ -, drawn on the Punjab National Bank, Chirgaon. District Shimla in her favour, 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 initiate 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-II, Shimla, camp at Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., which came to be

registered as Criminal Appeal No. 17-R/10 of 2018, however fact remains that same was dismissed, as a result of which, judgment of conviction and

order of sentence recorded by 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 17.3.2021, this Court while suspending the substantive sentence imposed by learned court below, directed the accused to deposit

entire amount of compensation within a period of four weeks and furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to

the satisfaction of learned trial Court, but till date aforesaid order has been not complied with.

Today, during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the petitioner has placed on record compromise arrived interse petitioner

and the respondent/ complainant, perusal whereof reveals that sum of Rs. 79,000/- in cash has been paid to the complainant by the accused, whereas

accused has also agreed that sum of Rs.25,000/- lying deposited in the trial Court, shall also be released in favour of the respondent/complainant.

Mr. Jai Dev Thakur, learned counsel representing the respondent-complainant while fairly acknowledging the factum with regard to aforesaid

compromise arrived interse parties, submits that since respondent/complainant has received entire amount of compensation awarded by learned trial

court, he shall have no objection in case this Court compounds the offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act. Compromise, as taken note hereinabove, is taken on record.

Since both the parties have entered into the compromise and sum of Rs. 79,000/-stands already paid to the respondent/ complainant coupled with

the fact that petitioner has also given his consent to release sum of Rs.25,000/- lying deposited in the trial Court in favour of the

respondent/complainant, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner that case at hand can be ordered

to be compounded 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.

Learned trial Court below is directed to release the amount deposited by the petitioner-accused in favour of the complainant forthwith, by remitting

the same in her saving bank account, detail whereof shall be furnished within a period of ten days by counsel representing the respondent/complaint.

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