Himachal Pradesh High Court
Jubbal vs Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) Scc 663 As ... on 25 November, 2021
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 39 OF 2020
BETWEEN:-
SURENDER KUMAR, S/O
SH.KARAM CHAND, R/O
VILLAGE NANDPUR, TEHSIL
JUBBAL, DISTRICT SHIMLA,
H.P. ....PETITIONER
(BY SH. RAHUL MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SHANKAR CHOPRA S/O LATE
SH. JANAK RAM CHOPRA, R/O
KUMARHATTI, TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.
2. STATE OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH. ....RESPONDENTS
(BY SH.RAMAKANT SHARMA, ADVOCATE,
FOR RESPODNENT NO. 1).
(BY SH.RAJU RAM RAHI, DEPUTY
ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR
RESPODNENT NO. 2).
Whether approved for reporting?
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered
the following:
JUDGMENT
Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment,
dated 19.12.2018, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Solan, H.P., in
Criminal Appeal No. 20-S/10 of 2016, whereby judgment/order dated
17.8.2016/19.8.2016, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Solan, District Solan, H.P. in Criminal Case No. 70/3 of 15, convicting
and sentencing the petitioner-accused under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to
pay compensation of `40,000/- to the complainant, has been affirmed.
2. Mr.Dheeraj K. Vashisht, learned counsel for petitioner,
.
under instructions, in his statement recorded today in the Court, has
stated that he is authorized and competent to make statement on behalf
of petitioner that in case respondent is ready to accept the amount of
compensation and to withdraw the complaint, then petitioner does not
intend to contest the petition on merits and in such eventuality he has
instructions to pray for compounding the case and, therefore, petitioner
has no objection for release of entire amount of compensation i.e.
`10,000/- deposited by him in the Registry of this Court and `30,000/-
deposited in the trial Court during pendency of appeal before appellate
Court. According to him, he has deposed in consonance with the
instructions imparted to him for compounding the case.
3. Respondent No. 1/complainant Shankar Chopra, in his
statement has accepted the offer of petitioner for compounding the case
and prayer for release of entire compensation amount in his favour by
remitting the same in his bank account No. 1493000100055561, Punjab
National Bank, Nigulsari Branch, District Kinnaur, H.P. and also for
withdrawing the complaint. He has further stated that he has deposed
in this Court out of his free will, consent and also without any external
pressure, coercion or threat of any kind.
4. Consequently, respondent No. 1/complainant is permitted to
withdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising
out of dishonor of cheque, under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, is treated to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction
and sentence passed by the Courts below are quashed and set aside.
Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for exemption
.
of compounding fee on the ground that due to poor financial condition,
petitioner could not pay the amount well in time and now he is not in a
position to pay 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 State Legal Services Authority Vs.
Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690, a lenient view be taken
and the petitioner be exempted from payment of compounding fee.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances and ratio of
law laid down by the Apex Court in aforesaid cases, instead of 15% of
the cheque amount, petitioner/accused is directed to deposit `1,000/- as
compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla
within four weeks from today.
7. After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shall
place a copy of receipt of deposit of compounding fee on record of this
petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with the
H.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla within eight weeks from
today, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically
revive.
8. As an amount of `10,000/- has been deposited by petitioner
in the Registry of this Court, therefore, Registry of this Court is directed
to release the said amount, along with interest, if any, to respondent No.
1/complainant Shankar Chopra, by remitting the same in his bank
account No. 1493000100055561, IFSC Code: PUNB0149300, Punjab
National Bank, Nigulsari Branch, District Kinnaur, H.P. `30,000/- has
been deposited by the petitioner in the Trial Court, therefore, the Trial
.
Court is also directed to release the amount of compensation of
`30,000/-, deposited by the petitioner/accused in favour of respondent
No. 1/complainant Shankar Chopra, along with interest, if any accrued
thereon, without issuing notice to the accused-petitioner (Surender
Kumar) by remitting the same in his bank account 1493000100055561,
IFSC Code: PUNB0149300, Punjab National Bank, Nigulsari Branch,
District Kinnaur, H.P., on production of copy of this order in the trial
Court.
9. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also
the pending application(s), if any.
10. Copy of this judgment be sent to H.P. State Legal Services
Authority, Shimla.
11. Parties are permitted to use downloaded copy from the High
Court website for depositing the compounding fee with the H.P. Legal
Services Authority, Shimla and for other purposes also. Concerned
authority shall not insist for certified copy. Passing of order may be
verified from High Court website.
Copy Dasti.
(Vivek Singh Thakur),
th
25 November, 2021 Judge.
(Keshav)
