Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ashok Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 2 August, 2021
CRR-409-2021 (O&M) -1-
234
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
CRR-409-2021 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 02.08.2021
****
Ashok Kumar
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA
Present: Mr. Suneel Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana.
None for respondent No.2/complainant
****
SUDIP AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside of
judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 28.09.2018, passed by the
Court below, i.e. Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula, and the order dated
26.02.2021 passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula, whereby his
appeal has been dismissed.
2. The petitioner was convicted of the offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act in NACT No.275 of 2016, and was sentenced
accordingly. His appeal against such judgment of conviction was also
dismissed. Thereafter, the instant petition has been filed.
3. During the pendency of this revision petition, the parties
concerned have arrived at a settlement, which fact has already been noted in
the order dated 06.04.2021.
4. Seen Office Report, in which it is mentioned that the petitioner
has deposited the requisite amount of `11,723/- which is equivalent to 15% of
1 of 2
CRR-409-2021 (O&M) -2-
the original cheque amount as compounding fees in terms of the earlier order
dated 06.04.2021. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has also filed through e-mail
photostat copies of the concerned receipts; Be kept on record.
5. No one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent
No.2/complainant to oppose the compromise.
6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and
another", 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and "Narinder Singh and Others Vs.
State of Punjab and Another", (2014) 6 SCC 466, has opined that no useful
purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the
complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioner/accused.
7. In the circumstances and in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in "Damodar S.Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.", 2010(5) SCC
663, as also in "Gulab Das Vs. State of M.P.", 2012 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal)
220 and "Mukesh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan", 2013 (11) S.C.C. 511,
while sustaining conviction of the petitioner for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the matter is disposed off,
along with the pending application(s) if any, with a direction that no further
sentence needs to be suffered by him nor any fine needs to be paid, apart from
the sentence already undergone by him. NACT No.275 of 2016, and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are also hereby quashed on the
basis of compromise qua the present petitioner.
02.08.2021 (SUDIP AHLUWALIA)
Apurva JUDGE
1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
2. Whether reportable: Yes/No
2 of 2
