Himachal Pradesh High Court
Mathia Ram Son Of Shri vs Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) Scc 663 As ... on 19 July, 2022
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 19th DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 107 of 2020
Between:-
MATHIA RAM SON OF SHRI
SHERU RAM, R/O VILLAGE
KAJEWAG, P.O. SHARIA,
TEHSIL PACHHAD, DISTRICT
SIRMOUR, H.P.-173024. ....PETITIONER
(BY SH. KISHORE PUNDEER, ADVOCATE)
AND
ASHOK KUMAR SON OF SHRI
SUNDER SINGH, R/O VILLAGE
KANLOG, P.O. BANAH-KI-
SER, TEHSIL PACHHAD,
DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P. ....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI RUPINDER SINGH THAKUR, ADVOCATE.)
Whether approved for reporting?
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment, dated 23.12.2019, passed by learned Sessions Judge Sirmour District at Nahan, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 72-Cr.A./10 of 2019, whereby judgment/order dated 11.6.2019/12.6.2019, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Rajgarh (camp at Sarahan) District Sirmour, H.P., in Complaint No. 251 of 2015, convicting and sentencing the petitioner- accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to undergo ::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2022 20:01:40 :::CIS 2 Cr. Revision No. 107 of 2020 simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of 1,00,000/- to the complainant, has been affirmed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, .
submits that in present case cheque amount was Rs.50,000./- and compensation was awarded double of the cheque amount which is maximum compensation which can be awarded under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the said amount stands deposited by the petitioner in the Registry of this Court and petitioner has instructed him to pray for compounding the case by releasing the amount of compensation in favour of respondent without adjudicating the petition on merits, but by disposing the case as provided under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that he has instructions to submit that respondent is not ready to consent for compounding as according to him amount of compensation awarded by the Court is inadequate and this is fifth round of litigation, therefore, respondent is entitled to be compensated adequately. Learned counsel for respondent/complainant has also submitted that in addition to liability to pay compensation amount extendable to twice of the chaque amount, petitioner/accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act is also liable to be punished with imprisonment which may extend to two years.
4. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act empowers the Court to award compensation in favour of complainant, which may extend to twice to amount of cheque. The maximum compensation has already been awarded by the trial Court. Therefore, I am of considered opinion that respondent stands adequately compensated in the matter. ::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2022 20:01:40 :::CIS 3 Cr. Revision No. 107 of 2020
5. So far as imprisonment is concerned, in case of compounding the accused/petitioner is to be acquitted and in view of provision of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, present case .
is compounded and complaint arising out of dishonor of cheque, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is treated to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that considering the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 as clarified by the Apex Court in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690, a lenient view be taken and the petitioner be exempted from payment of compounding fee.
7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances and ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in aforesaid cases, instead of 15% of the cheque amount, petitioner/accused is directed to deposit 2,000/- as compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla within four weeks from today.
8. After depositing compounding fee, petitioner shall place a copy of receipt of deposit of compounding fee on record of this petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with the H.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla within four weeks from today, the consequential action shall follow to recover the said amount as fine under Cr.P.C.
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2022 20:01:40 :::CIS 4 Cr. Revision No. 107 of 2020
9. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.
10. Copy of this judgment be sent to H.P. State Legal Services .
Authority, Shimla.
11. Parties are permitted to use downloaded copy from the High Court website for depositing the compounding fee with the H.P. Legal Services Authority, Shimla and for other purposes also. Concerned authority shall not insist for certified copy. Passing of order may be verified from High Court website.
Copy Dasti.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), th 19 July, 2022 Judge.
(Keshav) ::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2022 20:01:40 :::CIS