Smt. Chandrakala vs Smt. A S Shantha
2022 Latest Caselaw 10220 Kant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

                            BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY

 CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.396 OF 2021
BETWEEN:

Smt. Chandrakala,
W/o. Ashwathanrayana,
Aged about 37 years,
Residing at No.16,
2nd Cross, 1st Main,
Cheluvappa Garden,
Bhuvaneshwarinagar,
K.P. Agrahar,
Bangalore-560 023.
                                                    .. Petitioner
(By Sri. A. Ramachandra, Advocate)

AND:

Smt. A.S. Shantha,
W/o. P. Shantraj,
Aged about 48 years,
R/at No.39, 4th Cross,
J.J.R. Nagar South
Bangalore - 560 018.
                                                    ..Respondent
(By Smt. Sunitha H. Singh, Advocate)

                                 ***
      This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397
read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying
to (a) set aside the judgment dated 08-01-2020 passed in
Crl.Appeal No.1210/2016 on the file of the LXIII Addl. City Civil &
Sessions Judge (CCH-64) at Bangalore, and consequently;
                                                          Crl.R.P.No.396/2021
                                     2


(b) set aside the judgment dated 24-09-2016 passed in
C.C.No.30110/2014 on the file of the XXIII Additional C.M.M.,
Bangalore; (c) call for records dated 08-01-2020 passed in
Crl.Appeal No.1210/2016 on the file of the LXIII Addl. City Civil &
Sessions Judge (CCH-64) at Bangalore and dated 24-09-2016
passed in C.C.No.30110/2014 on the file of the XXIII Addl.
C.M.M., Bangalore; (d) to grant such other relief as deemed fit in
the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and
equity.

      The Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Orders
through physical hearing/video conferencing hearing, this day,
the Court made the following:


                           ORDER

The present revision petition has been filed by the

accused, challenging the judgment of conviction and order

on sentence passed by the Trial Court in

C.C.No.30110/2014, holding the accused guilty for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as

the "N.I. Act"), which was further confirmed by the

Sessions Judge's Court in the appeal filed by her.

Challenging the impugned judgments of conviction and

order on sentence passed by both the Courts, the petitioner

has filed the present revision petition.

Crl.R.P.No.396/2021

2. Learned counsels from both side along with their

respective clients, as identified by their learned counsels,

are physically present in the Court.

3. Learned counsels from both side have filed a joint

application - I.A.No.1/2022, under Section 147 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity

referred to as "the N.I. Act") read with Section 320 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, along with the

independent affidavits of the petitioner (accused in the Trial

Court) and the respondent (complainant in the Trial Court),

reporting the settlement between them by way of

compromise and seeking acquittal of the petitioner herein

(accused in C.C. No.30110/2014).

4. Learned counsels for the parties also make their

submission on the lines of the terms of the compromise

petition.

5. The sum and substance of the sworn affidavits

filed by both parties is that, the parties have settled the

matter amicably, stating that the petitioner (accused in the

Trial Court) has paid a total sum of `2,75,000/- to the Crl.R.P.No.396/2021

respondent in cash and the respondent (complainant in the

Trial Court) has acknowledged the receipt of the said sum,

as a full and final settlement in the matter and to compound

the offence under Section 147 of the N.I. Act.

6. The enquiry made with the parties who are

physically present convinces the Court that both the parties

out of their free consent and volition and in their best

interest have settled the matter amicably which is further

corroborated by the submissions made by their learned

counsels. As such, I am of the view that on the terms of

the said joint application, the parties be permitted to

compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I. Act,

however, subject to the payment of the graded cost by the

petitioner/accused.

7. Section 147 of the N.I. Act has made every

offence punishable under the N.I. Act as compoundable. As

such, there is no bar for the parties in the proceeding to

compound the offence. However, at the same time, the

guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S.

Crl.R.P.No.396/2021

Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H reported in AIR 2010 SUPREME

COURT 1907 regarding imposing graded cost on litigant also

to be borne in mind. According to the said Judgment in

Damodar S. Prabhu's Case (supra), if the application for

compounding is made before the Sessions Court or High

Court in revision or appeal, such compounding is permitted

to be allowed on the common condition that the accused

pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of graded cost.

8. The petitioner has also filed a memo, seeking for

appropriate orders with respect to a sum of `56,250/- said

to have been deposited by the petitioner herein in the Trial

Court in C.C.No.30110/2014 through Q No.11614/16-17

dated 04-11-2016.

9. Admittedly, in the instant case, the two cheques'

amount is for a sum of `3,34,000/-, as such, the graded

cost would be `50,100/-.

10. Accordingly, taking into consideration the joint

application- I.A.No.1/2022, the independent affidavits filed

by both side, the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Apex Crl.R.P.No.396/2021

Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra) and the

circumstance of the case on hand, I proceed to pass the

following:

ORDER

[i] The Joint application - I.A.No.1/2022

filed by both side under Section 147 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, read with

Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973, is allowed;

[ii] The parties to the present petition are

permitted to compound the offence under Section

147 of the N.I. Act, as per the terms of the

settlement arrived at between them, however,

subject to the petitioner herein (accused) paying

a sum of `50,100/- (Rupees Forty Thousand One

Hundred Only) towards graded cost, in the Trial

Court, within a week from today;

[iii] Subject to the payment of graded cost,

the petitioner herein - Smt. Chandrakala

W/o. Ashwathanrayana, who was the accused Crl.R.P.No.396/2021

before the Trial Court in C.C.No.30110/2014 is

acquitted of the alleged offence punishable under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,

1881;

[iv] However, this order of compounding

of the offence and acquittal of the petitioner

herein would come into operation and would

enure to the benefit of the petitioner, only after

the graded cost is paid, as ordered above. In

case of non-deposit of the graded cost in its

entirety, today's order would not enure to the

benefit of the petitioner and in which event, the

impugned judgments of conviction and order on

sentence continues to hold good against the

petitioner herein(accused).

[v] The Trial Court is directed to

refund/release the amount said to have been

deposited by the present petitioner (accused) to

her, after deducting a sum of `50,100/- (Rupees

Forty Five Thousand Only) towards graded cost, Crl.R.P.No.396/2021

however, after her due identification and in

accordance with law.

Accordingly, the present revision petition stands

disposed of as settled between the parties amicably subject

to the payment of the graded cost by the petitioner herein,

as ordered above.

Registry to transmit a copy of this order to the

concerned Trial Court immediately and ensure the

appropriation of the graded cost, as ordered above, within a

week from today.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BMV*