Ramesh Kumar vs Roop Lal And Anr

Sandeep Sharma, J

Instant criminal revision petition, lays challenge to judgment dated 4.1.2025, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No. 113 of 2024, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.7.2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chachiyot at Gohar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Complaint No. 222/2018, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the 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 a period of three months and pay compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- to the respondent-complainant.

Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in the competent court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued cheque amounting to Rs. 80,000/- in favour of the complainant, but fact remains that the aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. Since accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, respondent/complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings before the competent Court of law under Section 138 of the Act.

Learned trial Court on the basis of pleadings as well as evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 29.7.2024, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, sentenced him as per the description given herein above.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the court below, accused preferred an appeal before learned First Appellate Court, which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 4.1.2025, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present petitioner-accused has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below.

Mr. Sudhir Bhagnagar, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused states that parties have settled their dispute amicably for a sum of Rs. 95,000/-. He states that sum of Rs. 78,000/- already stands deposited with the learned trial Court, whereas accused undertakes to pay sum of Rs. 17,000/- to the respondent/complainant within twenty days, as such, this Court while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, may compound the offence and acquit the accused.

Mr. Harish Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, states that he has no objection in compounding the offence and acquitting the accused from the charges framed against him under Section 138 of the Act in case sum of Rs.78,000/- lying deposited before the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in his client's favour.

Respondent-complainant Sh. Roop Lal, states on oath that he of his own volition and without there being any external pressure has entered into compromise with the petitioner for a sum of Rs.95,000/-. He states that sum of Rs.78,000/- already stands deposited with the learned trial Court, whereas accused has undertaken to deposit/pay sum of Rs. 17,000/- within twenty days. He shall have no objection in compounding the offence in case amount lying deposited before the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in his favour.

Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of compensation stands paid or agreed to be paid to the respondent-complainant and respondent has no objection in compounding the offence, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for compounding of offence, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction.

Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 20.7.2024 and 4.1.2025, passed by the learned courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, are discharged. It is made clear that petitioner shall pay sum of Rs.17,000/- to the respondent/complainant within twenty days, failing which he shall render himself liable for penal consequences as well as contempt of court. The petition is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.