Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lasky Kumar vs Ravi Jain And Another on 4 December, 2023
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:154318
2023:PHHC:154318
CRM-50575-2023
in/and CRR-2764-2023 ::1::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-50575-2023
in /and CRR-2764-2023 (O & M)
Date of decision: 04.12.2023
Lasky Kumar .... Petitioner
V/s
Ravi Jain and anr.
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. Sahil Soi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bansal, Advocate,
for respondent No.1.
Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, DAG, Punjab,
for respondent No.2-State.
*****
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)
The present revision petition has been filed against the order
dated 19.09.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide
which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 12.03.2018 passed by the Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar, has been dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant had
been visiting the accused who was running the business under the name and
style of Harris Dyers and Dry Cleaners. As the accused took Rs.12,00,000/-
from the complainant on 10.04.2014 and agreed to return part payment of
the said amount in the month of May 2014 and the remaining amount in the
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:154318
2023:PHHC:154318
CRM-50575-2023
in/and CRR-2764-2023 ::2::
month of September 2014. In the month of May 2014, the accused failed to
return the part payment but he executed an undertaking on 30.05.2014
wherein he confirmed his undertaking to return the amount upto September,
2014 and issued three post dated cheques in favour of the complainant
including a cheque No.569423 dated 16.09.2014 for an amount of
Rs.4,00,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank Ltd. On presentation of the aforesaid
cheque for encashment, the same was received back unpaid vide memo
dated 09.12.2014 with the remarks "Accounts Closed". The accused was
served with a legal notice dated 05.01.2015 within time but he failed to
make the payment, leading to initiation of proceedings under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. In the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 filed by the complainant, the petitioner-accused was
summoned to face the trial. The evidence was led and ultimately, accused-
petitioner was held guilty and accordingly, convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and it
was also ordered that the accused will pay compensation under Section 357
of the Cr.P.C. to the tune of the cheque amount i.e. Rs.4,00,000/- at the rate
of 9% p.a. from the date of the cheque till date i.e. 12.03.2018
4. That aggrieved against the said judgment of conviction and
order of sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional
Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, which came to be dismissed on 19.09.2023.
5. Still aggrieved, the present revision petition has been preferred
by the petitioner. Alongwith the present criminal revision, an application
(CRM-50575-2023) under Section 320(6) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:154318
2023:PHHC:154318
CRM-50575-2023
in/and CRR-2764-2023 ::3::
been filed for permitting the compounding of the offences under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act as the parties have amicably settled the
dispute with intervention of respectable persons of the society. In terms of
the compromise deed dated 28.11.2003 (Annexure P-1) the petitioner-
accused has made a payment of Rs.5,75,000/- in cash as lump sum payment
towards both the dishonoured cheques i.e. Cheque No.908894 dated
23.09.2014 and Cheque No.569423 dated 16.09.2014. 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 respondent No.1 alongwith the learned
State counsel for respondent No.2 contend that as the matter has been settled
between the parties, they have no objection if the prayer made in the
application for compounding the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act is
allowed and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges framed against him.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
8. 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".
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:154318
2023:PHHC:154318
CRM-50575-2023
in/and CRR-2764-2023 ::4::
5. The compounding of the offence under Section 138 can 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."
9. 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 Section 320 Cr.P.C., the accused ought to be acquitted as the offence
stands 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
dated 19.09.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, as
well as the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.03.2018
passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar, are hereby set aside.
The petitioner is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act.
12. The petitioner is ordered to be released forthwith in case he is
not required in any other case.
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:154318
2023:PHHC:154318
CRM-50575-2023
in/and CRR-2764-2023 ::5::
13. Since the main petition has been disposed of no order needs to
be passed in the pending application(s), if any,
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
JUDGE
December 04, 2023
sukhpreet
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:154318
5 of 5
