Allahabad High Court
Rashid Alvi vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 March, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:54106 Court No. - 93 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7796 of 2024 Applicant :- Rashid Alvi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Naushad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ruchi Mishra, State Law Officer for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned summoning order dated 08.08.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Shamli as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 3026/9 of 2021 (Amit Panwar Vs. Rashid Alvi), under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, P.S. Kandhla, District Shamli pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Shamli.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant wants to compound the offence in question by moving appropriate application as required under 147 of the Act, 1881 and the same may be directed to be decided in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Syed Babalal H reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663.
4. Apex court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra) has issued following guidelines, paragraph no.21 of the said judgement is being quoted as under:
"21. With regard to the progression of litigation in cheque bouncing cases, the learned Attorney General has urged this Court to frame guidelines for a graded scheme of imposing costs on parties who unduly delay compounding of the offence. It was submitted that the requirement of deposit of the costs will act as a deterrent for delayed composition, since at present, free and easy compounding of offences at any stage, however belated, gives an incentive to the drawer of the cheque to delay settling the cases for years. An application for compounding made after several years not only results in the system being burdened but the complainant is also deprived of effective justice. In view of this submission, we direct that the following guidelines be followed:
THE GUIDELINES
(i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows:
(a) That directions can be given that the writ of summons be suitably modified making it clear to the accused that he could make an application for compounding of the offences at the first or second hearing of the case and that if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the court without imposing any costs on the accused.
(b) If the accused does not make an application for compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for compounding is made before the Magistrate at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be required to pay 10% of the cheque amount to be deposited as a condition for compounding with the Legal Services Authority, or such authority as the court deems fit.
(c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in revision or appeal, such compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of costs.
(d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque amount."
5. In view of the above, the present application is disposed of with a direction that if the applicant moves an application before appropriate court for compounding u/s 147 the Act, 1881, within a period of 15 days along with the required deposit of 10% of the cheque amount, the said application shall be considered by the court below in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu (supra), within a period of next 15 days.
6. It is further provided that if the applicant files the said application within the aforesaid period with required deposit, then for a period of one month or till disposal of the application of the applicant for compounding the offence, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
Order Date :- 29.3.2024 Nisha