Smt. Leela vs Sayed Babalal H. (2010)5 Scc 663
2021 Latest Caselaw 4053 HP

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
                 ON THE 23rd DAY OF AUGUST, 2021




                                                                  .

                                 BEFORE
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
                CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 77 OF 2021





Between:-


 SMT. LEELA
 W/O SH. BHAGWATI PRASAD,





 R/O KUMAR HOUSE, TYPE 2,
 DISTRICT SHIMLA HP
                                                              ....PETITIONER
(BY SH. GAURAV SHARMA, ADVOCATE)


AND
1. SH. SANJAY KUMAR
   S/O LATE SH. ATMA RAM,
   R/O 3rd FLOOR, NEAR SHIVALIK


   HOUSE, JYOTI NIWAS, VILL.SARGHIN,
   P.O. KASUMPTI, DISTT. SHIMLA

2. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH




                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI TOPENDER KUMAR VERMA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1)





(BY MS. DIVYA SOOD, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR R-2)
(PETITIONER SMT. LEELA AND RESPONDENT SANJAY KUMAR
ARE PRESENT IN PERSON)





Whether approved for reporting?

This Petition coming on for admission this day, this Court delivered the
following:


                          JUDGMENT

Present revision petition has been filed assailing

judgment dated 11.03.2020, passed by learned Additional Sessions

Judge-cum-Special Judge (CBI), Shimla, District Shimla H.P., in Cr.

Appeal No. 24-S/10 of 2019, whereby judgment/order dated

.

30.09.2019/26.11.2019, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st

Class, Court No.3, Shimla, District Shimla, in criminal case No. 592-

III of 2018/2016, convicting and sentencing the petitioner/accused

to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to

pay compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- to the complainant, has been

affirmed.

2. Complainant-respondent, present in person, has

stated, in his statement, that the matter has been amicably settled

and as per terms of compromise, on release of Rs.1,70,000/-,

deposited by petitioner in the Registry of this Court, to him, he is

ready to withdraw the complaint and has prayed for deciding the

matter in terms of compromise. He has stated that he has deposed

in Court out of his free will, consent and also without any kind of

threat, coercion or pressure etc.

3 Petitioner, who is also present in person, vide separate

statement placed on record, has endorsed the statement of

complainant as true and correct, and has also communicated no

objection for releasing the amount, deposited by her in the

Registry of this Court, in favour of complainant. She has also

deposed that she has made the statement in Court out of her free

will, consent and also without any kind of threat, coercion or

pressure etc.

.

4 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.

5 Learned counsel for the petitioner has also prayed for

exempting 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 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 for exemption of compounding fee.

6. Petitioner is a lady and she was arrested for serving

the sentence as she was not able to arrange money and she was

enlarged on bail on 08.04.2021. Thereafter, she has arranged

money from here and there from her relations.

7. Considering facts and circumstances of the case and

keeping in view the poor financial condition of petitioner, I am of

.

the opinion that it is an appropriate case to exempt compounding

fee. Therefore, petitioner is exempted to deposit the compounding

fee.

8 Registry of this Court is directed to release

Rs.170,000/-, along with up-to-date interest, in favour of

respondent No.1 by remitting the same in his bank account , details

whereof shall be supplied by said respondent himself or through his

counsel to the Registry.

9. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so

also the pending application(s), if any.

August 23,2021                                  (Vivek Singh Thakur)
(ms)                                                   Judge