Himachal Pradesh High Court
Date Of Decision: 15.10.2024 vs Seema Sharma on 15 October, 2024
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
2024:HHC:9751
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No. 154 of 2020
Date of Decision: 15.10.2024
__________________________________________________________________________
Belwanti Devi & Ors.
.........Petitioners
Versus
Seema Sharma
.......Respondent
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioners: Mr. Aditya Chouhan, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Lakshay Parihar, Advocate.
_________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read
with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to
judgment dated 18.03.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No. 1-N/10 of 2018,
affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
30.11.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sirmaur
District at Nahan, H.P., in Criminal Complaint No. 56/3 of 2015, whereby
learned Court below, while holding petitioner-accused (hereinafter
'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 six months
and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,25,000/- to the respondent-
complainant (hereinafter 'complainant).
2024:HHC:9751
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are
that 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 his lawful liability issued cheque bearing No. 847220 dated
09.02.2015 amounting to Rs. 1,50,000/- in favour of complainant,
however, the same was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the
bank account of the accused. Since accused failed to make the payment
good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, complainant was
compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act before the
competent Court of law.
3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record
by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 30.11.2017, held the
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 learned Court below, accused preferred an
appeal in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District
at Nahan, H.P., which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated
18.03.2020, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded
by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background,
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.
2024:HHC:9751
5. Before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own
merit, parties have entered into compromise, whereby they have resolved to
settle the dispute amicably inter se them.
6. Today, during proceedings of the case, learned counsel for the
accused, states that accused is ready and willing to make payment of
entire compensation amount awarded by the learned Court below. He
states that since accused has no objection in case, amount lying deposited
with the learned trial Court as well as Registry of this Court are ordered to
be released in favour of the complainant, this Court, while exercising power
under Section 147 of the Act may proceed to compound the offence and
acquit the accused from the charge framed against him.
7. Mr. Lakshay Parihar, Advocate, states that in case, sum of Rs.
1,12,500/- lying deposited with the learned trial Court and sum of Rs.
1,12,500/- lying deposited with the Registry of this Court are ordered to be
released in favour of complainant, complainant shall have no objection in
compounding the offence. His statement is taken on record.
8. Since parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably
inter se them, as has been taken note hereinabove, coupled with the fact
that complainant has no objection in compounding the offence, in the
event of his being released the amount lying deposited with the Registry of
this Court as well as learned trial Court, this Court sees no impediment in
accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding the
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.
2024:HHC:9751
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.
9. Consequently, in view of the discussion made hereinabove as
well as law taken into consideration, present matter is ordered to be
compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated
18.03.2020 and 30.11.2017, passed by the learned Courts below are
quashed and set-aside and the 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, discharged. The petition is disposed of alongwith
pending applications, if any.
10. Sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- deposited by the accused with the
learned trial Court as well as Registry of this Court are ordered to be
released in favour of complainant by remitting the same in his bank
account, detail whereof, shall be furnished within a period of one week.
11. Since complainant was compelled to engage in unwarranted
litigation with the accused for realization of his own amount, accused is
directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation charges to the complainant within
a period of six weeks.
(Sandeep Sharma)
Judge
October 15, 2024
(sunil)
