Punjab-Haryana High Court
Davinder Kumar vs Arun Singla And Another on 7 July, 2022
CRR-1675-2021 (O&M) -1-
(244) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRR-1675-2021 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 07.07.2022
Davinder Kumar
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Anr.
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Nitin Arora, Advocate for respondent No.2-Complainant.
****
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The present revision petition has been filed against the order
dated 23.11.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri
Muktsar Sahib, vide which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.06.2019 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sri Muktsar Sahib, has been dismissed.
2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the complainant had cordial
relation with the accused and the accused took a friendly loan of
Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant in the month of September, 2017. In
order to discharge the above said legal liability, the accused issued one post
dated cheque No.027619 Sr. No.32027619 dated 10.01.2018 amounting to
Rs.2,00,000/- drawn at Union Bank of India, Branch Sri Muktsar Sahib in
1 of 5
CRR-1675-2021 (O&M) -2-
favour of the complainant. The accused signed the above said cheque in
presence of the complainant. The accused assured the complainant that the
said cheque will be honoured/encashed on its presentation to the bank. The
complainant was maintaining his account at Punjab and Sind Bank, Branch
Dashmesh Khalsa College, Sri Muktsar Sahib and the complainant presented
the above said cheque to the accused's banker for encashment of the cheque
amount and the complainant banker forwarded the above said cheque to the
accused's bank through clearing house, but this cheque was returned unpaid
to the banker of the complainant as dishonoured with the remarks "Closed
Dormant" vide memo dated 10.01.2018 and the accused's banker returned
the above said cheque along with memo to the complainant's banker and the
complainant's banker returned the same to the complainant. The accused
intentionally and malafidely got his account closed/dormant from his banker
and malafidely issued the cheque in question in order to defeat the recovery
of the complainant, which was ultimately dishonoured. The accused was duly
served with registered legal notice dated 18.01.2018 by the complainant
through his counsel, but the accused did not pay any amount. The accused
was fully aware that there was no insufficient funds in his account and was
not able to clear the above said cheque but the accused issued the cheque, in
favour of the complainant intentionally and malafidely to defraud him.
3. Thereafter, a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881, was filed, where the petitioner-accused was
summoned to face the trial. The evidence was led and ultimately, he was held
guilty and accordingly, convicted for the offence punishable under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and sentenced to undergo
2 of 5
CRR-1675-2021 (O&M) -3-
rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 year and fine of Rs.100/- and in
default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for 07
days.
4. That aggrieved against the said judgment of conviction and order
of sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, which came to be dismissed on
23.11.2021.
5. Still aggrieved, the present revision petition has been preferred
by the petitioner. During the pendency of the present criminal revision
petition, a compromise dated 09.02.2022 has been effected stating that the
matter has been settled amicably to the entire satisfaction of both the parties
and now the parties shall not claim any further amount or costs in this matter.
Both the parties have agreed to relinquish all their rights arising out of this
matter. It would be relevant to mention here that a reading of Section 147 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 320 Cr.P.C. would show
that where a settlement has been effected, the offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded on account of the fact
that a mutual compromise has been effected between the parties.
6. The learned counsel for the complainant-respondent has
accepted the factum of compromise and has stated that he has no objection if
the petitioner is acquitted of the charges framed against him.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
8. This Court in 'Vatsa Electronics Vs. Pala Ram & Anr. decided on
09.03.2022 in CRR-1585-2019' has also held that once a settlement is being
effected, then in terms of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and
3 of 5
CRR-1675-2021 (O&M) -4-
Section 320 Cr.P.C., the accused ought to be acquitted as the offence stands
compounded.
9. The admitted position is that the matter stands settled and the
settlement agreement between the parties dated 05.09.2019 is already on
record. This Hon'ble Court in 'Ramesh Chander Vs. State of Haryana and
another, 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 245' held as under:-
"4. As per the provisions of Section 147 of the Act, the
offence under Section 138 is compoundable. Section 147 reads
as under:-
"Offence to be compoundable-
Notwithstanding anything contained in the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973(2 of 1974), every offence punishable
under this Act shall be compoundable".
5. The compounding of the offence under Section 138can
be done during the trial of the case as well as by the High Court
or Court of Session while acting in the exercise of its power of
revision under Section 401 Criminal Procedure Code Reference
may be made to Section 320(6) Criminal Procedure Code in this
regard.
6. Further, under Section 320(8) Criminal Procedure
Code the composition of an offence shall have the effect of
acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been
compounded."
10. In view of the above, since, the parties have voluntarily settled
the disputes between themselves, it is a fit case for allowing them to
compound the offence.
11. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed and the order dated
23.11.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar
Sahib and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.06.2019
4 of 5
CRR-1675-2021 (O&M) -5-
passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sri Muktsar Sahib, are
hereby set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the charge under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
(JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
JUDGE
07.07.2022
JITESH
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
5 of 5
