M.N.Purushothaman vs Leela Varghese @ Leelamma Varghese

P.G. Ajithkumar, J

The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.1048 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Piravom. He was convicted by the learned Magistrate for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I.Act) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. He was further directed to pay compensation of Rs.9,97,000/-. In the appeal, the conviction was confirmed. But the sentence was modified. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and directed to pay compensation Rs.9,97,000/- to the complainant, who is the 1st respondent herein. Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, this Revision Petition has been filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code).

The petitioner and the 1st respondent have settled the dispute. They together filed Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2020 seeking permission to compound the offence. This Court as per the order dated 31.08.2021 directed the revision petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount of Rs.9,97,000/- as compounding fees. Later, the petitioner filed Crl.M.A.No.2 of 2021 seeking to modify the said order directing to deposit 15% of the cheque amount. That petition was disposed of, granting one month more time to deposit the costs for compounding and refusing to modify the order.

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that he is satisfied with the amount of Rs.3,99,200/-, which the petitioner had deposited in the trial court as per the orders of the Appellate Court, besides Rs.1,00,800/-, which was already paid to her by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority v. Pratheek Jain [(2014) 10 SCC 690], wherein it was held that payment of costs for compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act is not mandatory in every case, but only discretionary, seeks to waive the cost for compounding.

When the learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that considering the present financial condition of the petitioner, she was prepared to compound the offence on accepting the aforesaid amounts of Rs.3,99,200/- and Rs.1,00,800/- and to forgo the balance amount due to her, it is only just and appropriate to exempt the petitioner from making payment of the cost of compounding. Accordingly, Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2021, which is filed seeking permission to compound the offence is allowed. The offence is allowed to be compounded. Consequently the Review Petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused in C.C.No.1048 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Piravom is acquitted under Section 320(8) of the Code.