AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
14 paragraphs · 507 words.
Bipin Chander Negi, J
Cr. Revision No.136/2024 & Cr.MP No.1329/2024
In the instant Revision Petition, an application under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as “the N.I. Act”), for compounding of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, has been filed by the petitioner.
From perusal of the application, it is evident that the petitioner is a poor person and belongs to Below Poverty Line (BPL).
No reply is intended to be filed to the present application.
Learned counsel for the respondent-bank submits that in the case at hand, with respect to which the cheque in question has been issued, stands settled/satisfied. The same is evident from Annexure P-1 appended alongwith the petition, whereby, the respondent-bank has released the property of the petitioner which had been mortgaged with the respondent-bank. The respondent has no objection, if in case the offence in the case at hand is compounded.
Briefs facts giving rise to the case at hand are that on a complaint filed by the present respondent against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chopal, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Case No.75-2021, the petitioner had been convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a compensation amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation, he was to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.
Feeling aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment dated 05.09.2023 and order of sentence dated 30.09.2023, the present petitioner had preferred Criminal Appeal No. 49-S/10 of 2023. The said appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 16.01.2024.
Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, the present petitioner had preferred present Criminal Revision before this Court.
During pendency of the present Revision Petition, the petitioner had compromised the matter with the respondent.
Consequently in view of aforesaid, this Court finds no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner through application (Cr.M.P. No. 1329 of 2024) for compounding of the offence and the same is allowed. The matter is ordered to be compounded inter se parties. Impugned judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by both the learned Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
In terms of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, the petitioner was required to pay compounding fee i.e. 15 % of the cheque amount as costs. However, taking into account the fact that the petitioner is a poor person and belongs to BPL category, the compounding fee in the case at hand is reduced to 5% of the cheque amount. The same be paid to the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Kusumpati, Shimla-9, H.P. within a period of eight weeks from today.
Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.