Mukesh Sharma vs Tilak Raj

Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.PC, is directed against the judgment dated 16.5.2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu District Kullu H.P. in Cr. Appeal No. 01 of 2017, affirming the judgment/order dated 20.10.2016/21.10.2016, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, H.P. in complaint No. 1123-I/2013 (old) 519- I/2016/519-III/2016 (New) , whereby the learned trial Court while holding petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the Act), convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,30,000/- to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months..

Briefly stated facts, necessary for adjudication of the case are that the respondent-complainant, on request from the petitioneraccused, extended loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the petitioner accused. Petitioner-accused with a view to discharge his liability issued cheque bearing No. 049171 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- dated 3.7.2013 of account No. 3155181771, drawn at the Central Bank, Branch, Kullu, H.P. However, fact remains that aforesaid cheque was dishonoured on its presentation to the bank concerned. Since petitioner-accused failed to make payment good within the stipulated time despite requests having been made by the respondent-complainant through legal notice, he was compelled to initiate proceedings against the petitioner-accused, under Section 138 of the Act, before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, H.P.

Subsequently, learned trial Court, on the basis of evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, held the petitioneraccused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and vide judgment/order dated 20.10.2016 and 21.10.2016, convicted and sentenced him as per description given supra.

Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied with judgment of learned trial Court, petitioner-accused preferred an appeal before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, HP, however, fact remains that the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 16.5.2017, as a result of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, petitioner-accused approached this Court by way of instant criminal revision petition, seeking therein his acquittal after setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction passed by the courts below.

On 8.8.2017, learned counsel for the parties informed this Court that parties have amicably settled the matter inter-se them. This Court with a view to ascertain correctness and genuineness of the aforesaid statements having been made by the learned counsel for the parties, summoned parties to the Court and sequel to orders dated 8.8.2017 and 5.9.2017, parties have come present before this Court today. Learned counsel for the parties, on instructions of their respective clients, who are present before the Court, reiterated that parties have compromised the matter and as such, matter can be ordered to be compounded in terms of judgment passed by the Hon''ble Apex Court passed in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663.

This Court also recorded statements of the parties, who on oath stated that they have entered into compromise with each other with their free will and volition, for an amount of Rs. 1,45,000/- i.e. (1,30,000/-+15,000/-). Petitioner-accused stated on oath before this Court that he has no objection in case, amount of Rs. 1,30,000/-, which already stands deposited before the learned trial Court, is released in favour of the respondent complainant. However, Complainant while acknowledging factum with regard to compromise having arrived interse parties stated that he may be awarded adequate compensation over and above the cheque amount since, he was unnecessarily dragged into litigation that too for realization of his own money. He further stated that if the aforesaid amount (Rs. 15,000/-) is paid to him within a stipulated period, he has no objection in case judgment of conviction recorded against the petitioner is quashed and set-aside.

Consequently, in view of the aforesaid statement having been made by the respondent-complainant as well as law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court (supra), present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner accused is acquitted of the charges framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, discharged. However, it is made clear that petitioner accused shall pay an amount of Rs. 15,000/- as a litigation charges to the respondent complainant within a period of fifteen days from today, failing which, he shall render himself liable to face penal consequences as well as contempt of Court.

Learned trial Court is directed to release amount of Rs. 1, 30,000/- in favour of the respondent-complainant forthwith alongwith up-to-date interest. Respondent-complainant is at liberty to approach this Court for revival of the present petition, in case, petitioner accused fails to honour his commitment made before this Court. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.