Himachal Pradesh High Court
Hari Om vs Rajinder Bhaik on 6 March, 2023
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No.375 of 2021
Date of Decision: March 4, 2023
Hari Om ...Petitioner.
.
Versus
Rajinder Bhaik ..Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr.Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate.
Petitioner is present in person.
For the Respondent: Mr.Narnder Singh Thakur, Advocate.
Vivek Singh Thakur, J (oral)
Present Revision Petition has been filed, assailing judgment dated 26.07.2021, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahar, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.17 of 2020, titled as Hari Om vs. Rajinder Bhaik, whereby judgment/order dated 07.03.2020, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Rampur Bushahar, District Shimla, H.P., in Case No.209 of 2016, titled as Rajinder Bhaik vs. Hari Om, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of `2,80,000/- to the complainant, has been affirmed.
2. During pendency of present revision petition, matter has been settled amicably. To this effect, statements of petitioner-Hari Om and Shri Narender Singh Thakur, Advocate, 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2023 20:33:06 :::CIS 2 learned counsel for the respondent-complainant, have been recorded, separately, and placed on the file.
3. In his statement, petitioner-Hari Om has stated that in case respondent is ready to accept the amount of .
compensation plus `5000/- in addition thereto, which shall be paid by him within a month, he, instead of contesting the petition on merit, is ready for compounding the case and in that eventuality he has no objection for release of the amount deposited by him in the Registry of this Court as well as before the Trial Court, in favour of respondent-Rajinder Bhaik, Proprietor of V.V. Enterprises. He has further stated that because of loss in the business, he could not arrange the amount payable to the respondent, which led to the litigation and he has deposited the amount in the Court by arranging from his near, dear and family members. He has prayed that he be exempted from paying the compounding fee by taking a lenient view. Further that, he has deposed in this Court, out of his free will, consent and without any external pressure, coercion or threat of any kind.
4. In his statement, Mr.Narender Singh Thakur, Advocate, for the respondent-complainant has stated that he has instructions to compound the case against receipt of amount alongwith additional amount as litigation charges and the amount deposited by the petitioner in the Registry of this Court as well as before the Trial Court be directed to be released in favour of the respondent by remitting the same in his bank account on supplying details thereof to the Registry of this Court ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2023 20:33:06 :::CIS 3 as well as to the Trial Court and matter be decided in terms of compromise. He has further stated that his deposition in Court is strictly in consonance with instructions imparted to him by the respondent.
.
5. Consequently, in view of statements of the petitioner and counsel for the respondent-complainant, complaint arising out of dishonour of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be withdrawn and matter is compounded 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 has submitted that petitioner is facing poor financial condition and is not able to pay compounding fee @ 15% and, therefore, a prayer has been made by learned counsel for exempting the compounding fee, keeping in view ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663, as clarified in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, instead of 15% of the cheque amount, it shall be appropriate to levy `5000/- as compounding fee upon the petitioner-accused. Accordingly, he is directed to deposit a sum of `5000/-, as compounding fee, with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, on or before 03.04.2023.
::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2023 20:33:06 :::CIS 4
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 Services Authority, Shimla on .
or before 03.04.2023, consequential action shall follow to recover the said amount as fine under Code of Criminal Procedure.
9. Cheque amount was of `2,65,000/-. Whereas, compensation has been awarded as `2,80,000/-. Therefore, in my opinion `5,000/- in addition to the compensation amount shall be sufficient as token of litigation charges keeping in view the financial status of the petitioner and that amount of `5000/- shall be payable by the petitioner on or before 03.04.2023, failing which aforesaid judgment of conviction shall revive and in addition, he shall also be liable to face consequences for giving false undertaking to the Court.
10. Registry is directed to release the amount deposited by the petitioner, alongwith interest, if any accrued thereon, in favour of the respondent-complainant by remitting the same in its bank account No.309602010003298, IFSC-UBIN0530964, Union Bank of India, Kotagarh Branch, Chandigarh - 172 031.
11. Trial Court is also directed to release the amount deposited by the petitioner, alongwith interest, if any accrued thereon, in favour of respondent-complainant, without issuing notice to the petitioner, by remitting the same in its Bank ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2023 20:33:06 :::CIS 5 Account No.309602010003298, IFSC-UBIN0530964, Kotagarh Branch, Chandigarh - 172 031.
12. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also pending application(s), if any.
.
13. Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this order, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the trial Court/authorities concerned, and the said Court/authorities shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if required, may verify it from Website of the High Court.
14. A copy of this order be sent to the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.
March 4, 2023 (Purohit) ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2023 20:33:06 :::CIS