Himachal Pradesh High Court
Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Sushant Thakur & Another on 25 April, 2018
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No. 45 of 2017
.
Decided on : 25.4.2018
Bhupinder Kumar Sharma .....Petitioner.
Versus
Sushant Thakur & another ....Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner: r Mr. Vishal Panwar, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rakesh Manta, Advocate, for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Hemant Vaid, Addl. A.G. with Mr.
Y.S. Thakur, Dy. A.G., for respondent
No.2.
Sureshwar Thakur, J (oral)
The instant petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., whereby he affirmed the judgment of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. of 30.9.2015, pronounced in Case No. 1963-3 of 2014/13, convicting and sentencing the accused/petitioner, for, his committing offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 28/04/2018 22:54:55 :::HCHP...2...
2. During the pendency of the revision petition before .
this Court, the respondent/complainant, has, in his statement on oath, duly reduced into writing and signatured by him, made a disclosure therein, that, in case this Court orders for a sum of Rs.
1,25,000/- lying deposited before the learned Magistrate concerned, and, a further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- lying deposited in the Registry of this Court, being ordered to be released in his favour, thereupon he holds no objection if this Court proceeds to accept the instant criminal revision. Moreover, he has also stated on oath, that thereupon the revisionist/accused be acquitted of the charge.
3. Consequently, accepting the statement rendered on oath by the respondent/complainant, the offence constituted by the dishonour of Negotiable Instrument, is ordered to be compounded. In sequel, the revision petition is accepted, and, the impugned judgments are quashed and set-aside. The petitioner/ accused stands acquitted of the charge. The deposited amount with the learned trial Magistrate concerned, and, the amount deposited in the Registry of this Court be respectively released vis-
::: Downloaded on - 28/04/2018 22:54:55 :::HCHP...3...
à-vis the respondent/complainant, by remission in his saving .
account, against proper receipt and identification.
4. Though, it is imperative for this Court, to, as a condition precedent, for recording a binding order for composition, of offence(s) arising out of dishonour of Negotiable Instruments Act, impose, upon the convict, penalty equivalent to 15%, of the amount, comprised in the dishonoured negotiable instrument(s). However, the petitioner/accused, has, in his statement, on oath, duly reduced into writing and signatured by him, made a disclosure that since he is undergoing expensive treatment vis-à-vis the critical condition of his kidney thereupon his being disabled to deposit 15% of the cheque amount, before, the State Legal Services Authority, and, this Court waiving imposition, of, penalty, in a sum quantified, at 15% of the amount, (a) conspicuously in consonance, with, the mandate of the Apex Court, occurring, in a judgment titled as Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another reported in (2014) 10 SCC 690, wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court, has, on evident display of indigent circumstances, besetting the convict, permitted High Courts, to exempt/waive imposition, of penalty in a sum quantified, at 15% of the amount, constituted in the dishonoured Negotiable Instrument ::: Downloaded on - 28/04/2018 22:54:55 :::HCHP ...4...
Act. Consequently, with the evident display, of, indigent .
circumstances, besetting, the accused, this Court is constrained, to not impose upon him, penalty quantified at 15% of the sum(s), comprised, in the dishonoured negotiable instrument.
5. In view of the above directions, the instant petition stands disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
25th April, 2018 (Sureshwar Thakur),
(kck) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 28/04/2018 22:54:55 :::HCHP