Himachal Pradesh High Court
Mandir vs Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) Scc 663 As ... on 15 November, 2021
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 250 OF 2020
BETWEEN:-
INDERJEET SEDHA S/O
JASWANT RAJ SEDHA R/O
WARD NO. 1 NEAR DURGA
MANDIR, AMLOH, DISTRICT
FATHEGARH PUNJAB. ....PETITIONER
(BY SH. DHEERAJ K. VASHISHT, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. BIRENDRA BAHADUR SINGH,
S/O GANGA SAGAR R/O H. NO.
E-12 STAFF COLONY 121,
INDUSTRIAL AREA, DEEPAK
SPINNER LTD. BADDI
DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.
2. STATE OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH. ....RESPONDENTS
(BY SH.ANUJ GUPTA, ADVOCATE, FOR
RESPODNENT NO. 1).
(BY SH.RAJU RAM RAHI, DEPUTY
ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR
RESPODNENT NO. 2).
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 7.10.2020, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No. 4-NL/10 of 2020, whereby judgment/order dated 6.12.2019, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No. 2, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. in Cr. Complaint No. 98/3 of 2018, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:17:12 :::CIS 2 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of `2,20,000/- to the complainant, has been affirmed.
.
2. Mr.Dheeraj K. Vashisht, learned counsel for petitioner, under instructions, in his statement recorded today in the Court, has stated that he is authorized and competent to make statement on behalf of petitioner that petitioner intends to compromise the matter and, therefore, petitioner has no objection for release of entire amount of compensation i.e. `1,76,000/- deposited by him in the Registry of this Court and `44,000/- deposited in the trial Court during pendency of appeal before appellate Court. He has further stated that he has also instructions to communicate that due to poor financial condition, petitioner is not in a position to pay compounding fee and, therefore, prayer for exemption of payment of compounding fee has been made. According to him, he has deposed in consonance with the instructions imparted to him for compounding the case.
3. Mr.Anuj Gupta, Advocate, learned counsel representing respondent No. 1/ complainant, in his statement has stated that he is authorized and competent to make statement on behalf of respondent No. 1 and he has instructions to communicate that respondent No. 1 is ready to withdraw the complaint for release of entire amount in his favour and prayer for awarding some additional amount for compounding the case has also been made. Lastly, he has deposed that his deposition in Court is strictly in consonance with instructions imparted to him by respondent No. 1/complainant. ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:17:12 :::CIS 3
4. So far as prayer for awarding additional amount made on behalf of respondent No. 1/complaint is concerned, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and time taken for .
adjudication of present case in comparison to other older cases, I do not consider it a fit case to award additional amount of compensation other than the amount of compensation awarded by the trial Court.
5. Consequently, respondent No. 1/complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint and matter 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 has prayed for exemption of compounding fee on the ground that due to poor financial condition, petitioner could not pay the amount well in time and now he is not in a position to pay the compounding fee. It is also submitted by him 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 `5,000/- as compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla within four weeks from today.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:17:12 :::CIS 4
8. After depositing compounding fee/cost, 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 eight weeks from today, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically revive.
9. As an amount of `1,76,000/- has been deposited by petitioner in the Registry of this court, therefore, Registry of this Court is directed to release the said amount, along with interest, if any, to the respondent No. 1/complainant Birendra Bahadur Singh, by remitting the same in his bank account to be supplied by the respondent in person or through his counsel `44,000/- has been deposited by the petitioner in the Trial Court, therefore, the Trial Court is also directed to release the amount of compensation, deposited by the petitioner/accused in favour of respondent No. 1/complainant Birendra Bahadur Singh, along with interest, if any accrued thereon, without issuing notice to the accused- petitioner (Inderjeet Sedha) by remitting the same in his bank account, details whereof shall be furnished by him either in person or through counsel at the time of production of copy of this order in the trial Court.
10. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.
11. Copy of this judgment be sent to H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla.
12. 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 ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:17:12 :::CIS 5 authority shall not insist for certified copy. Passing of order may be verified from High Court website.
Copy Dasti.
.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), th 15 November, 2021 Judge.
(Keshav)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:17:12 :::CIS