Himachal Pradesh High Court
Date Of Decision: 03.07.2024 vs Neelam Kumari & Ors on 3 July, 2024
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
2024:HHC:4502
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No. 501 of 2022
Date of Decision: 03.07.2024
__________________________________________________________________________
Gulshan Kumar .........Petitioner
.
Versus
Neelam Kumari & Ors. .......Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner: Mr. Asheesh Patial, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate.
_________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read
with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, lays challenge to judgment
dated 30.06.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge. Hamirpur. H.P., in
Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 2019, affirming the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 07.11.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Nadaun. District Hamirpur. H.P.. in Complaint No.
134-1/2015, whereby court below, while holding the petitioner-accused
guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'Act') convicted and sentenced him to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and pay
compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,35,000/- to the respondent-complainant.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are
that respondent-complainant (for short complainant') filed a complaint
under Section 138 of the Act in the competent court of law, alleging therein
that accused with a view to discharge her liability issued cheque
amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/- in favour of the complainant, 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, 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 07.11.2019, held the
petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence 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 learned court below, accused preferred an
appeal in the court of learned Sessions Judge. Hamirpur, H.P., which came
to be dismissed vide judgment dated 30.06.2022 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 20.09.2022, this court suspended the
substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court below subject to
petitioner's depositing 50% of the compensation amount and furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- within a period of four weeks.
During proceedings of the case, parties expressed their intention to settle
the matter amicably interse them and as such, matter was referred to
National Lok Adalat. Though, before National Lok Adalat. parties entered
Into compromise, whereby petitioner-accused has agreed to pay entire
.
amount of compensation to the complainant, but since share of minor was
Involved, matter was again referred to this court. This court having taken
note of the fact that a sum Rs. 3,05,000/- has been deposited with the
Registry of this Court, vide order dated 22.05.2024, ordered release of
1/3rd of aforesaid amount in favour of Neelam Kumari. W/o Vikramjeet
Singh, as a result thereof, interest of minor stands protected. It is pertinent
to note that original complainant Vikramjeet Singh had died during
pendency of complaint under Section 138 of the Act and thereafter, his LRs
are brought on record. Today, during proceedings of the case, learned
counsel for the petitioner, while making this court peruse order passed by
National Lok Adalat, submitted that entire amount of compensation has
been agreed to be paid by the petitioner-accused stands deposited in the
Registry of this Court as well as learned trial Court. He states that sum of
Rs. 3,05,000/- was deposited in the Registry of this court, out of which
1/3rd amount has already been ordered to be released in favour of Neelam
Kumari, whereas remaining sum of Rs. 1,30,000/- is lying deposited with
the learned trial court.
6. Mr. Raman Jamalta, learned counsel for the
respondents. on instructions, states in case amount lying deposited with
the learned trial Court as well as Registry of this Court is ordered to be
released in favour of respondents-complainants, he shall have no objection
in compounding the offence. Having taken note of the fact that parties have
already agreed to compromise the matter before National Lok Adalat and in
furtherance of the same, petitioner-accused has already deposited the
entire amount of compensation with the Registry of this Court as well as
.
learned trial Court, this court sees no impediment in 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 by the courts below.
7.
Consequently, well as law taken into consideration, present
matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of
conviction and sentence dated 07.11.2019 and 30.06.2022, 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.
8. Since amount falling in the share of Neelam Kumari stands
already deposited pursuant to order dated 22.05.2022, no further orders
are required to be passed for release of remaining amount, which otherwise
belong to other legal representatives of deceased complainant, who are
minor at this juncture. Needless to say, other respondents after having
attained majority can approach competent court of law for release of
amount lying deposited with the Registry of this Court as well as learned
trial court. Needless to say, Registry of this court as well as trial Court
shall invest the amount in FDR till further orders.
(Sandeep Sharma)
Judge
.
July 03, 2024
(sunil)
r to
