Delhi District Court
Raman Sheorah vs Seema Kathuria on 18 October, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER KUMAR GOYAL
ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE: FAST TRACK COURT
ROHINI:DELHI
Criminal Appeal No. 86/12
Unique case ID No. 02404R0282662012
Raman Sheorah
S/o late Jia Lal
R/o H.No. D564,
Rishi Nagar, Rani Bagh,
Delhi.
...Appellant
Versus
Seema Kathuria
W/o Sh. Vijay Kathuria
R/o H.No. 112, Rishi Nagar,
Top Floor, Rani Bagh,
Delhi
.....Respondent
Date of institution of the case: 16/10/12
Arguments heard on: 18/10/12
Date of Decision: 18/10/2012
JUDGMENT
This is a criminal appeal u/s 374 of Cr.PC filed against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 11/09/2012 and 18/09/2012 passed by Ld Trial Court.
In brief, in a case filed U/s. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, CA No. 86/12 1/3 appellant was convicted and was awarded one year simple imprisonment alongwith compensation of Rs. 60,000/ payable to the complainant.
Both impugned judgment and order on sentence have been challenged on various grounds but with the intervention of the Court, matter has been settled down between both the parties for a sum of Rs. 75,000/, out of which, Rs. 60,000/ has been paid by the appellant to the respondent today and is undertaking that remaining Rs. 15,000/ will be paid to the respondent during the course of the day at her house.
Ld counsel for both the parties have contended that the matter can be compounded even at the stage of appeal and in support of same they have relied upon the Damodar S. Prabhu Vs Sayed Babala H. of Supreme Court of India also reported as AIR 2010 SC 1907.
I have considered the submissions of Ld counsel for parties and have gone through the judgment relied upon. According to section 147, offences punishable under Negotiable Instrument Act is compoundable.
It has also been held in K.M.Ibrahim V. K.P. Mohammed and Anr.,2009 (14) SCALE 262 that " It is true that the application under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was made by the parties after the proceedings had been concluded before the Appellate Forum. However, Section 147 of the aforesaid Act does not bar the parties from compounding an offence under Section 138 even at the appellate stage of the proceedings. Accordingly, we find no reason to reject the application under Section 147 of the aforesaid Act even in a proceeding under Article 136 of the Constitution."
According to it, offence u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act can be compounded at the appellate stage also.
CA No. 86/12 2/3
Considering the above facts and circumstances, as the matter has been compromised by both the parties, I allow the compounding of the offence u/s 138 of N.I. Act. Sentence as imposed by Ld Trial Court vide order dated 18/09/2012 is set aside, as settled.
It has also been held in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs Sayed Babala H. of Supreme Court of India that if the matter is compromised in the court of Appeal before the court of Sessions Court than the same be allowed on the condition that the accused will pay 15 percent of the cheque amount by way of cost. It has also been held that scale of cost has been suggested in the interest of uniformity. The competent court can of course reduce the costs with regard to the specific facts and circumstances of a case, while recording reasons in writing for such variance.
Considering the above facts and circumstances, as appellant is living as a retired person and remained unable to pay the amount for quite a long time, I am of the opinion that the 15% cost of the cheque will be on higher side. Accordingly the cost at the rate of 1% of the cheque is imposed on appellant. Appellant is directed to deposit 1% of total amount of cheque of Rs. 30,000/ i.e. Rs.300/ in the court as Cost.
TCR be sent back with copy of order to the concerned court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate.
Appeal file be consigned to record room.
Announced in Open Court on dated 18th of October, 2012 (Virender Kumar Goyal) Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Court Rohini : Delhi CA No. 86/12 3/3 CA No. 86/12 4/3 CA No. 86/12 5/3