Rakesh Chauhan vs H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 4, Shimla, H.P. in criminal complaint Case No. 121-3 of 2019/16, titled as H.D.F.C Bank Ltd., The Mall Shimla Branch vs. Rakesh Chauhan, dated 08.08.2019, which criminal case stood disposed of by the learned Trial Court, by sentencing the present petitioner, vide order of sentence dated 13.08.2019, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,80,000/- to the complainant, in view of the fact that cheque in issue was issued in the year 2016, as well as the judgment passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, 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-Bank, and the entire due amount stands paid by the petitioner to the respondent-Bank. This fact is not disputed by learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of said development, it will be in the interest of justice, 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-Bank, 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 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, as shall be ordered by the Court, 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 compounding fee at the rate of 5% of the cheque amount by the petitioner, which shall be deposited by the petitioner with State Legal Service Authority, Shimla, within a period of four weeks from today. As a consequence, the judgment as well as order of sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 4, dated 08.08.2019/ 13.08.2019, as also the judgment passed in appeal by learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, H.P. dated 26.11.2019, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Trial Court, are ordered to be set aside. Let a compliance affidavit in this regard be thereafter filed by the petitioner within two weeks, with the Registrar (Judicial).

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

Copy dasti.