Between vs M/S P.V.J. Fruit & Vegetable ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5231 HP

                               1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                 ON THE 15th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021




                                                          .
                           BEFORE





           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
                 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 264 of 2021





     Between:-
     SH. VIKAS JISHTU, S/O SH.
     NIHAL SINGH, R/O VILLAGE
     LAUGA, P.O. THANEDHAR,





     TEHSIL         KUMARSAIN,
     DISTRICT   SHIMLA    (H.P.),
     PROPRIETOR OF M/S PVJ
     FRUIT TRADERS.
                      r                          ...PETITIONER
     (BY SHRI PARMOD SINGH THAKUR,

     ADVOCATE)

     AND


1.   SH. DURGA SINGH, S/O SH.
     BUDHI RAM, R/O VILLAGE
     KOTHI, P.O. & SUB-TEHSIL
     NANKHARI, DISTRICT SHIMLA,




     H.P.
                             ...RESPONDENT-CLAIMANT





2.   STATE       OF  HIMACHAL
     PRADESH          THROUGH





     SECRETARY (HOME), GOVT. OF
     H.P., SHIMLA-2.
                                             ...RESPONDENT
     (M/S I. N. MEHTA & SARTHAK MEHTA,
     ADVOCATE, FOR R-1.
     SHRI    ASHOK      SHARMA,       ADVOCATE
     GENERAL, WITH M/S SUMESH RAJ,
     ADARSH SHARMA & SANJEEV SOOD,
     ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERALS & MR.
     KAMAL     KANT       CHANDEL,       DEPUTY
     ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR R-2)
     Whether approved for reporting? No.




                                         ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:17:09 :::CIS
                                         2

__________________________________________________________
              This petition coming on for admission after notice this day, the Court
passed the following:




                                                                       .
                                   JUDGMENT

By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has

challenged judgment/order, dated 27.04.2017/29.04.2017, passed by the

Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur Bushehr,

District Shimla, H.P. in Case No. 74-3 of 2016, titled as Durga Singh Vs.

M/s P.V.J. Fruit & Vegetable Commission Agent and another, r which

criminal case stood disposed of by the learned Trial Court by sentencing

the present petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six

months and also to pay Rs.80,000/- as compensation to the complainant

as well as judgment dated 30.09.2019, passed by the Court of learned

Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, vide

which, the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was upheld by the

learned Appellate Court and the appeal filed by the present petitioner

against the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was dismissed.

2. Mr. Parmod Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the

petitioner informs the Court that an amount of Rs.40,000/- now stands

deposited by the petitioner with the Registry of this Court. He further states

that as earlier an amount of Rs.40,000/- has been paid by the petitioner to

the respondent-Complainant, it will be in the interest of justice in case the

present petition is disposed of by compounding the offence and by ordering

the release of Rs.40,000/-, which now stands deposited by the petitioner in

.

favour of the respondent-complainant, as now nothing remains to be paid by

the petitioner to the respondent-complainant. Learned counsel further

submits that it will be in the interest of justice in case this Court exercises its

power of compounding the offence in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble

Supreme Court of India in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.

(2010) 5 Supreme Court Cases 663. He states that as the petitioner has

made good the amount due to the respondent-complainant, it will be in the

interest of justice, in case in terms of para-25 of the judgment of Hon'ble

Supreme Court (supra), the compounding fee of 15% of the cheque amount

is modified taking into consideration the peculiar facts of the case and the

financial condition of the petitioner. He assures the Court that in case the

offence is compounded by this Court, then the compounding fee shall be

paid by the petitioner within the time so granted by the Court.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and taking

into consideration the fact that the matter which led to filing of the criminal

case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, now stands

settled between the parties, this Court orders the compounding of the

offence in question, subject to the payment of 10% of the cheque amount as

compounding fee by the petitioner, which shall be deposited by the petitioner

with State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, within a period of eight weeks

from today. Let a compliance affidavit in this regard be thereafter filed by the

petitioner with the Registrar (Judicial). Accordingly, the sentence imposed

.

upon the petitioner by the learned Trial Court vide judgment/order dated

27.04.2017/29.04.2017 in Case No. 74-3 of 2016, titled as Durga Singh Vs.

M/s P.V.J. Fruit & Vegetable Commission Agent and another as affirmed by

the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dated 30.09.2019, passed in CIS

Case No. 45 of 2017, titled as Sh. Vikas Jistu Vs. Sh. Durga Singh, is set

aside. It is further ordered that the amount of Rs.40,000/-, which now stands

deposited by the petitioner-accused with the Registry of this Court, be

released in favour of the respondent-Claimant in his Bank account, details

whereof shall be provided by him with the Registry of this Court within a

period of one week.

The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also

pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

Copy dasti.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

November 15, 2021 (bhupender)