Lalita vs State Of Haryana And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 1919 P&H

CRR-2107-2019                                                               1

232   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

                                            CRR-2107-2019 O&M)
                                            Reserved on: 23.01.2023
                                            Date of decision : 30.01.2023

Lalita                                                        .....Petitioner

                         versus

State of Haryana and another                                  ..... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
        ***

Present :-   Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Kirpal Singh Thakur, AAG, Haryana.

             Mr. Neeraj Yadav, Advocate
             for respondent No.2.

             ***
RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

This revision has been filed by the petitioner impugning the

order dated 05.08.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Rewari whereby the conviction and sentence awarded by learned trial

Court vide order dated 17.09.2016 has been upheld. It has been contended

that both the Courts have fallen in error in convicting the petitioner and

awarding the sentence of 06 months under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act.

As per the facts of the case, petitioner borrowed a sum of

Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant as loan. In order to discharge his legal

liability, the accused/petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.761209 dated

02.01.2011 in favour of the respondent/complainant drawn on Punjab

National Bank, New Delhi. On 02.02.2011, the complainant presented the

said cheque with his banker and the same was dishonoured vide memo

1 of 3

dated 03.02.2011 with remark "Funds Insufficient". Thereafter, the

respondent-complainant sent a legal notice to the accused/petitioner on

04.02.2011 requesting her to make payment but despite receipt of the said

notice, no payment was made and thus, the complaint was filed. On the

conclusion of the trial the petitioner was convicted by the trial Court vide

order dated 17.09.2016 where the petitioner was sentenced to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for a period of 06 months under Section 138 of

Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner was further directed to pay

compensation to respondent/complainant of Rs.1,00,000/- as per the

provisions of Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner

filed an appeal and the Appellate Court also upheld the conviction and

sentence as awarded by learned trial Court and thus, dismissed the appeal

vide its order dated 05.08.2019. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had

filed the present revision petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that during the

pendency of this revision petition, the matter was referred to Mediation

Centre, Rewari where the parties settled the dispute and a

settlement/agreement dated 02.01.2023 was signed by them in the presence

of witnesses named therein. Learned counsel has further stated that as per

compromise, the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.1,35,000/- to the

complainant on 02.01.2023 in cash and amount of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited

by her in the Hon'ble High Court in compliance of order dated 29.08.2019

be released to the complainant. It is further submitted that once the parties

have settled the dispute amicably then in view of the law settled, the

prosecution of the petitioner would be nothing but an abuse of the process

of the Court and thus, the petitioner be allowed to compound the offence

and she be acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of Negotiable

2 of 3

Instruments Act in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayad Babalal H. 2010(2) RCR (Crl.) 851. He

has further relied upon the judgment dated 18.09.2013 passed in CRR-

3275-2012 titled as Karam Chand Mittal Vs. Gian Chand and another.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has affirmed the

contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and has prayed that

the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- lying deposited in the High Court be ordered

to be released to the complainant.

In view of the compromise effected between the parties and

the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's

case (supra), offence is compounded and the petitioner is acquitted of the

charges framed against her under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881, subject to her depositing Rs.30,000/- (15% of the cheque

amount) with the Poor Patients' Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh

within a period of two weeks from today. An amount of Rs.1,00,000/-

lying deposited with the Registry of this Court be released to the

complainant forthwith.

Petitioner is directed to file receipt of abovesaid amount of

Rs.30,000/- in the office within aforesaid period. In case the petitioner

fails to deposit the abovesaid amount within 15 days from the date of

pronouncement of this order, the office is directed to list the present case

in the ordinary list as IOIN for further orders.

Revision petition is allowed in above terms.

30.01.2023                                            ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ )
m. sharma                                                    JUDGE
             Whether speaking/reasoned            :     Yes/No
             Whether reportable                   :     Yes/No



                                         3 of 3