Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________________ vs Gurdev Singh on 10 June, 2024
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
Cr.R. No. 211 of 2024
Date of Decision: 10.6.2024
_____________________________________________________________________
Ashok Kumar
.........Petitioner
Versus
Gurdev Singh
.......Respondent
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner: Ms. Kamlesh Kumari, Advocate.
For the Respondent:
r Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 of read with Section 401 of Cr.PC, lays challenge to judgment dated 26.5.2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No. 2-NL/10 of 2022, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23/26.10.2021, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., in Cr. Complaint No. 242/3 of 2016, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the "Act"), convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple ::: Downloaded on - 10/06/2024 20:30:26 :::CIS 2 imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation to the tune .
of Rs. 5,20,000/- to the complainant.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent-complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in the competent court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued two cheques amounting to Rs. 4.00 lac (Rs. 2.00 lac each) in favour of the complainant, however fact remains that aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the bank account of the accused. Since petitioner-
accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, respondent/complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings before the competent Court of law under Section 138 of the Act.
3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 23/26.10.2021, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, sentenced him as per the description given herein above.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the court below, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated ::: Downloaded on - 10/06/2024 20:30:26 :::CIS 3 26.5.2023, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by .
the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present petitioner-accused has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below.
5. Vide order dated 10.4.2024, this Court suspended the substantive sentence imposed by the court below, subject to deposit of entire compensation amount, but before case at hand, could be heard and decided on its own merits, parties entered into compromise, whereby they have resolved to settle their dispute amicably for sum of Rs.3.00 lac. After having entered into compromise, petitioner herein filed application bearing CrMP No. 1218 of 2024, under Section 147 of the Act, for compounding the offence under Section 138 of the Act.
6. Having taken note of the aforesaid compromise, arrived inter-se parties, this court with a view to ascertain the correctness and genuineness of the compromise, placed on record, specifically called upon the parties to come present before this Court. Both the petitioner-accused as well as respondent have come present. Respondent-complainant Sh. Gurdev Singh, on oath states that he of his own volition and without there being any external pressure, has entered into compromise with the petitioner, whereby petitioner has paid Rs. 3.00 lac in lump sum towards final ::: Downloaded on - 10/06/2024 20:30:26 :::CIS 4 settlement and as such, he shall have no objection in case judgments of .
conviction passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges framed against him. His statement made on oath is taken on record.
7. Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of compensation stands paid to the respondent-complainant and respondent has no objection in compounding the offence, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made by the petitioner for compounding of offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction by the courts below.
8. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 23/26.10.2021 and 26.5.2023, passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, discharged. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.
June 10, 2024 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 10/06/2024 20:30:26 :::CIS