Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________________ vs Dharam Pal on 25 July, 2024
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No.451 of 2024
Date of Decision: 25.07.2024
_____________________________________________________________________
Ramesh Kumar
.........Petitioner
Versus
Dharam Pal
.......Respondent
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Ms. Rameshwari Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition, lays challenge to judgment
dated 12.07.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, District
Kullu, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2023, affirming judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 31.10.2022/02.11.2022, passed by
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lahaul-Spiti at Kullu, H.P., in
complaint No.92-I/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 imprisonment for a period of six
months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- 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 cheque amounting to Rs.4,80,000/- in
favour of the complainant, but fact remains that aforesaid cheque, on its
presentation, was dishonoured. Since petitioner-accused failed to make
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
31.10.2022/02.11.2022, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having
committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and
accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as per the description given
hereinabove.
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 Sessions Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh,
which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 12.07.2023, 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 17.07.2024, this Court suspended the
substantive sentence imposed by the Court below subject to the petitioner's
depositing 50% of the compensation amount and furnishing personal
bonds within four weeks.
6. Today, during proceedings of the case, Ms. Rameshwari
Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner has
entered into compromise with respondent-complainant, whereby parties
have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter se them. She states that
entire amount in question has been brought by the petitioner, which has
been further handed over to the complainant in the Court, as such, this
Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, may compound
the offence and acquit the accused.
7. Respondent-complainant Dharam Pal, who is present in the
Court and duly represented by Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, states on oath
that he of his own volition and without there being any external pressure,
has entered into compromise with the petitioner-accused. He states that
today, he has received the entire amount in question, as such, he shall
have no objection in compounding the offence and acquittal of the accused
from the charges framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. He
further states that since he has received the entire amount in question, he
has no objection in case amount of Rs.1,20,000/-, lying deposited with the
trial Court, is ordered to be released in favour of petitioner/accused. His
statement made on Oath is taken on record.
8. Having taken note of the fact that entire amount in question
stands paid or agreed to be paid to the respondent-complainant 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.
9. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to
be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated
12.07.2023 and 31.10.2022/02.11.2022, 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. Since respondent/complainant
has received the entire amount in question today in the Court, amount of
Rs.1,20,000/- lying deposited with the learned trial Court is ordered to be
released in favour of the petitioner-accused by remitting the same in his
saving bank account, detail whereof shall be furnished by his counsel
within one week. The petition is disposed of along with pending
applications, if any.
10. Since petitioner is behind bars, Registry is directed to prepare
the release warrants and send the same to the Superintendent of Jail,
concerned, forthwith, enabling aforesaid authority to release the petitioner
immediately, subject to verification that he is not required in any other
case.
July 25, 2024 (Sandeep Sharma),
(Rajeev Raturi) Judge
DN: C=IN, O=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL
MAMT PRADESH, OU=HIGH COURT OF
HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA,
Phone=36bb51250baa5a51385bbc5a5b42531
4fae384931dc610a63165c9febd25094e,
PostalCode=171001, S=Himachal Pradesh,
SERIALNUMBER=2987d79d0aae1f98d0fd566
A RAO 3fb63f715a53ab1add092fa3617b76bdc094f63
d9, CN=MAMTA RAO
Reason: I am approving this document
Location:
Date: 2024-07-26 16:40:01
