Himachal Pradesh High Court
Chattar Singh Thakur vs Beli Ram & Anr on 28 September, 2023
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No. 191 of 2014
Decided on : 28.9.2023
.
Chattar Singh Thakur
...Petitioner
Versus
Beli Ram & anr.
...Respondents
of
___________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?
rt
________________________________________________
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vinod K. Gupta,
Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Mukesh Sharma,
Advocate, for respondent
No. 1.
Mr. Tejasvi Sharma and Mr.
Mohinder Zharaick,
Additional Advocates
General with Ms. Leena
Guleria, Dy. A.G., for
respondent No. 2.
.
Virender Singh, Judge (oral)
Petitioner Chattar Singh Thakur has filed the present petition, against the judgment dated 13.6.2014, passed by the Court of learned Additional ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2023 20:34:17 :::CIS 2 Sessions Judge-II, Camp at Rohru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Court'), in Criminal Appeal No. RBT-3-R/10 of 2014/2009, titled as, 'Chattar Singh .
2. By way of judgment dated 13.6.2014, learned Appellate Court has dismissed the aforesaid appeal.
of The Judgment impugned before the Appellate Court was modified to the extent that accused shall also pay rt compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the complainant, apart from undergoing the sentence awarded.
3. The said appeal was preferred against the judgment of conviction, dated 20.5.2009 and order of sentence, dated 28.5.2009, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. (1), Rohru, District Shimla (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court'), in Case No. 82/3 of 2008/06, titled as, 'Beli Ram versus Chattar Singh'.
4. By way of judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred to above, the learned trial Court ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2023 20:34:17 :::CIS 3 has convicted the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') for the commission of offence, punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable .
Instrument Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the N.I. Act') and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of one year and to pay a of fine of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant.
5. The present Revision petition has been rt admitted by this Court, vide order dated 21.7.2014.
6. Petitioner, Chattar Singh Thakur, has deposited a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 1, Rohru and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohru. During pendency of the present revision petition, before this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an application, bearing Cr.MP No. 3656 of 2023, under Section 147 of the N.I. Act, for compounding the offence.
::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2023 20:34:17 :::CIS 47. In the said application, factual position, with regard to settlement of dispute with the respondent has been mentioned.
.
8. Today, petitioner is present before this Court and made statement on oath. Petitioner, Chattar Singh Thakur, in his statement, has stated, in unequivocal of terms, that he has deposited a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-
with the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rohru rt and Rs. 50,000/- with the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohru. He has put forward his indigent circumstances to deposit the compounding fee, with a prayer to grant him some time to deposit the compounding fee and to show some leniency.
According to him, if he fails to deposit the compounding fee, within the time granted by this Court, then, he shall surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence.
9. Respondent, in his statement, recorded on oath, before this Court, has accepted the statement made by the petitioner. He has prayed that the ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2023 20:34:17 :::CIS 5 amount, which the petitioner has deposited before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rohru and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohru, .
may be released in his favour. He has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the accused (petitioner) is acquitted from the offence, punishable of under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
10. Keeping in view the fact that the parties rt to the lis have compromised the matter, which is permissible under the provisions of Section 147 of the N.I. Act, the present petition is allowed, by setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, passed by the learned trial Court, and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, and accused is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, subject to payment of 8% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee. The amount shall be deposited by the accused with the Member Secretary, H.P. State ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2023 20:34:17 :::CIS 6 Legal Service Authority, Shimla, within six months, from today.
11. It is further clarified that in case of .
failure to deposit the compounding fee, within the prescribed period, the revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed and judgment of of conviction and order of sentence, shall revive automatically, and the applicant shall surrender rt before the learned trial Court to serve out the substantive sentence, imposed by the learned trial Court.
12. Accordingly, the present Revision Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The bail bonds furnished by the accused are ordered to be discharged.
The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.
(Virender Singh) Judge September 28 , 2023 Kalpana ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2023 20:34:17 :::CIS