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
20 paragraphs · 372 wordsSANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
Petitioner impugns order on conviction dated 17.04.2017 as well as order on sentence dated 25.04.2017 whereby the petitioner has been convicted
of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo an imprisonment for a period of four months as also to
pay an amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- as compensation and in default to further undergo an imprisonment for a period of three months.
The cheque amount was of Rs. 90,000/-. Parties have settled their disputes. As per the settlement, the petitioner has agreed to pay a total amount
of Rs. One lakh in full and final settlement of all the claims of the respondent. The said amount of Rs. One lakh has already been paid.
Respondent had appeared before the Court on 01.02.2018 and 13.08.2018. Parties had stated that they had settled their disputes and the petitioner
had agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondent in full and final settlement of his entire amount. Said amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has
already been paid and same was acknowledged by the respondent on 13.08.2018. Respondent has stated that he has no objection to the compounding
of the subject offence.
By order dated 13.08.2018, petitioner was directed to deposit cost equivalent to 15% of the cheque amount with Delhi State Legal Services
Authority in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayyad Babulal: (2010) 5 SCC 663. The cheque was of
Rs.90,000/-.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the original receipt evidencing the fact that the sum of Rs.13,500/- has been deposited with the
Delhi State Legal Services Authority on 25.10.2018. Copy of the same has been taken on record.
In view of the fact that the petitioner has settled with the respondent and paid the settlement amount and also deposited the cost in terms of the
judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu (supra), subject offence is compounded. The impugned order on conviction dated 17.04.2017 and also order on
sentence dated 25.04.2017 are set aside. Petitioner is acquitted of the said offence.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
Order Dasti under the signature of the Court Master.