Himachal Pradesh High Court
Date Of Decision: 28.8.2024 vs Sunder Singh on 28 August, 2024
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
2024:HHC:7479
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Criminal Revision No.15 of 2024
.
Date of Decision: 28.8.2024
_____________________________________________________________________
Gainda Mal and Anr.
.........Petitioners
Versus
Sunder Singh
.......Respondent
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioners: Mr. S.C. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr.
Arvind Negi, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Amardeep Singh, Advocate.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition, lays challenge to judgment
dated 10.8.2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II,
Shimla (camp at Theog), District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal
Appeal No. 31-T/10 of 2022, affirming judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 1.9.2022, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Shimla, Theog, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Case No.
40-III/2019, 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 imprisonment for a period of one year
and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the respondent-
complainant (herein after referred to as the "complainant" ).
2 2024:HHC:7479
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are
.
that 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 cheque amounting to Rs. 51,070/-, but fact
remains that aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured on
account of insufficient funds. 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 pleadings as well as
evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order
dated 1.9.2022, 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-II, Shimla, which also came to
be dismissed vide judgment dated 10.8.2023, 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
3 2024:HHC:7479
acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the
.
courts below.
5. Before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own
merit, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused states that parties have
entered into compromise, whereby respondent has agreed to settle the
matter for a sum of Rs.2.50 lakh in three cases i.e. Cr.R. No. 10, 12 and 15
of 2024. He states that since sum of Rs. 2.50 lakh, already stands paid to
the respondent-complainant, this Court may proceed to compound the
offence.
6. While placing on record acknowledgment/receipt, issued by the
respondent-complainant, Mr. Amar Deep Singh, Advocate, appearing on
behalf of the respondent states that his client has settled the matter with
petitioner-accused and as per terms of the compromise, he has already
received Rs. 2.5 lakh from him towards settlement in three cases i.e. Cr.R.
No. 10, 12 and 15 of 2024
2. Respondent-complainant namely Sunder Singh, who is present
in the Court, states on oath that he of his own volition and without there
being any external pressure, has entered into compromise with the
petitioner, whereby they have resolved to settle their dispute amicably. As
per compromise, he has received sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the petitioner
for compounding three cases including the present one i.e. Cr.R. Nos. 10,
12 and 15 of 2024 and shall have no objection in compounding the offence.
4 2024:HHC:7479
3. Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of
.
compensation stands deposited with the Registry of this Court and before
learned trial court and the same can be ordered to be released in favour of
the respondent, coupled with the fact that and respondent has no objection
in compounding the offence, this Court sees no impediment in accepting
the prayer made on behalf of 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..
4. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to
be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated
10.8.2023 and 1.9.2022, 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, are discharged. The petition is disposed of alongwith pending
applications, if any.
August 28, 2024 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
