Himachal Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Sharma vs Prem Singh on 23 December, 2019
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
.
Cr. Revision No. 131 of 2018
Date of Decision 23rd December, 2019
________________________________________________________
Rajesh Sharma ....Petitioner
Versus
Prem Singh ......Respondent
________________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Whether approved for reporting?1
______________________________________________________________
For the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Sehgal and Mr.Narender
Thakur, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr.Baldev Singh Negi, Advocate.
_____________________________________________________________
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.(oral)
Present revision petition has been filed assailing judgment dated 20.3.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla H.P., in Cr. Appeal No. 24- R/10 of 2017, whereby judgment/order dated 27/29.04.2017 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, in criminal case No. 237-3 of 2015 convicting and sentencing the petitioner/accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2019 20:27:02 :::HCHP 2 compensation of Rs.55,000/- to the complainant has been affirmed.
2. Learned counsel for respondent Prem Singh, under .
instructions, has stated in his statement that he is duly authorized and competent to make the statement on behalf of the respondent, as instructed by him and according to instructions imparted to him, petitioner Rajesh Sharma had to pay an amount of Rs.55,000/- in total to respondent Prem Singh, but, he has been instructed to make statement that matter has been amicably r settled and compromised with applicant/petitioner Rajesh Sharma and according to that compromise, amount deposited by petitioner in the Courts i.e. Rs.22,000/- in the trial Court and Rs.20,000/- in this Court is to be released in favour of Prem Singh by remitting the same in his bank account, particulars whereof shall be furnished in the trial Court and in the Registry of this Court, whereas remaining amount of Rs.13,000/- has been waived off by respondent and he shall not claim that amount in future and in turn, respondent Prem Singh has agreed to withdraw the complaint for compounding the case and petition be disposed of accordingly with direction to release Rs.42,000/- in favour of respondent Prem Singh. He has stated that he has made the statement strictly in accordance with instructions imparted to him by respondent.
::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2019 20:27:02 :::HCHP 33 Consequently, respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising out of dishonour of cheque under Section 138 .
of Negotiable Instrument Act is treated to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction and sentence passed by learned Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner/accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him.
4 Learned counsel for the pe titioner has also prayed for imposing the lesser amount of compounding fee instead of 15% of cheque amount. 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 Legal Services Authority vs. Prateek Jain and another (2014)10 SCC 690 , wherein it has been held that Court may reduce compounding fee for given facts and circumstances of a particular case, present case is a fit case of exemption of compounding fee.
5. Considering facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is an appropriate case to impose lesser compounding fee. Therefore, petitioner is directed to deposit compounding fee of Rs.1,000/- instead of 15% of cheque amount, with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla within four weeks from today.
::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2019 20:27:02 :::HCHP 46. After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shall place copy of receipt of deposit on record of this petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with H.P. .
State Legal Services Authority, Shimla within stipulated period, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically revive.
7 Registry of this Court is directed to release Rs.20,000/-, along with up-to-date interest, in favour of respondent by remitting the same in his bank account, details whereof shall be furnished by him either in person or through his counsel.
8. Trial Court is also directed to release the amount of Rs.22,000/-, deposited by petitioner, along with up-to-date interest, if any, accrued thereupon, in favour of respondent/complainant on production of copy of this judgment and furnishing the details of bank account.
9. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy of this judgment be also sent to H.P. State Lagal Services Authority, Shimla.
December 23, 2019 (Vivek SinghThakur),
ms Judge
::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2019 20:27:02 :::HCHP