Jai Singh vs State Of H.P. & Another

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has challenged judgment, dated 28.05.2014, passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Court No.1, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. in Criminal Complaint No. 116-1of 2013/68-III of 2013, titled as Himachal Gramin Bank,

Sundernagar Versus Jai Singh, which criminal case stood disposed of by the learned Trial Court by sentencing the present petitioner to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay Rs.84,000/- as compensation to the complainant as well as judgment dated 09.11.2020, passed

by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P., vide which, the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was

upheld by the learned Appellate Court and the appeal filed by the present petitioner against the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was dismissed.

The Court stands informed that during the pendency of the revision petition, the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner and the

respondent and the entire due amount stands paid by the petitioner to the respondent. This fact is not disputed by learned counsel appearing for the

respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits in view of said development, it will be in the interest in case this Court exercises its power of

compounding the offence in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5

Supreme Court Cases 663. He further submits that as the petitioner has made good the amount due to the respondent, it will be in the interest of

justice, in case in terms of para 25 of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (supra), the compounding fee of 15% of the cheque

amount is modified taking into consideration the peculiar facts of the case and the financial condition of the petitioner. He assures the Court that in

case the offence is compounded by this Court, then the compounding fee shall be paid by the petitioner within the time so granted by the Court.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that the matter which led to filing of the criminal case under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, now stands settled between the parties, this Court orders the compounding of the offence in question,

subject to the payment of 5% of the cheque amount as compounding fee by the petitioner, which shall be deposited by the petitioner with State Legal

Services Authority, Shimla within a period of six weeks from today. Let a compliance affidavit in this regard be thereafter filed by the petitioner with

the Registrar (Judicial).

The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.