Punjab-Haryana High Court
Satyawan Alias Satyawan Malik vs State Of Haryana And Another on 31 January, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:014812
118 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRR-272-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision: 31.01.2025
Satyawan alias Satyawan Malik ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Navmohit Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sumit Kamboj, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)
1. Present criminal revision petition has been filed against the
judgment dated 24.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar,
vide which judgment of conviction dated 23.08.2024 and order on quantum of
sentence dated 30.08.2024 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Hansi, convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act (in short 'the Act') and awarding him rigorous imprisonment
for 18 months with compensation of Rs.10,72,000/- along with default
mechanism, have been upheld.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the
petitioner was convicted by the learned trial Court under Section 138 of the Act
and awarded rigorous imprisonment of 01 year and 06 months and thereafter,
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:014812
CRR-272-2025 (O&M) -2-
his appeal was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar
on 24.01.2025 and the petitioner was taken into custody. He further submits
that on 27.01.2025 a compromise was effected between the parties as
discernible from Annexure P-1 and the entire settled amount as per the
compromise deed (Annexure P-1) has been paid to respondent No.2. He
further contends that the offence under Section 138 of the Act is compoundable
offence and relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in
'Meters and Instruments Private Limited and another Vs. Kanchan Mehta'
(2018) 1 SCC 560.
3. Mr. Sumit Kamboj, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of
respondent No.2 and files his vakalatnama in the Court today which is taken on
record. He affirms the factum of the compromise and submits that the entire
settled amount of Rs.10,72,000/- has been received by respondent No.2 as
settled vide compromise deed (Annexure P-1) and respondent No.2 has no
objection in case the offence under Section 138 of the Act is compounded and
the petitioner is acquitted of the notice of accusation.
4. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the submissions put
forth by all sides and on careful perusal of the material on record, it transpires
that matter has been compromised between the parties. Hence, this Court is
inclined to accept the prayer made by the petitioner.
5. Pertinently, the amendment carried out in the year 2002 in the NI
Act intended to make the nature of offence under Section 138 of the Act as a
civil wrong while making it compoundable. A two Judge Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Private Limited and another
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:014812
CRR-272-2025 (O&M) -3-
(supra), speaking through Justice A.K. Goel has held as under:-
"7. This Court has noted that the object of the statute was
to facilitate smooth functioning of business transactions.
The provision is necessary as in many transactions'
cheques were issued merely as a device to defraud the
creditors. Dishonour of cheque causes incalculable loss,
injury and inconvenience to the Vide the Banking, Public
Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws
(Amendment) Act, 1988 payee and credibility of business
transactions suffers a setback. At the same time, it was also
noted that nature of offence under Section 138 primarily
related to a civil wrong and the 2002 amendment
specifically made it compoundable...... xxxx xxxx xxxx
18.2. The object of the provision being primarily
compensatory, punitive element being mainly with the
object of enforcing the compensatory element,
compounding at the initial stage has to be encouraged but
is not debarred at later stage subject to appropriate
compensation as may be found acceptable to the parties or
the court.
18.3. Though compounding requires consent of both
parties, even in absence of such consent, the court, in the
interests of justice, on being satisfied that the complainant
has been duly compensated, can in its discretion close the
proceedings and discharge the accused."
6. In view of the above discussion, the present revision petition is
allowed and consequently, the offence under Section 138 of the Act is
compounded and judgment dated 24.01.2025 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Hisar, judgment of conviction dated 23.08.2024 and order on
quantum of sentence dated 30.08.2024 passed by learned Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Hansi, are hereby set aside and petitioner is acquitted of the
notice of accusation framed against him. The petitioner is ordered to be
released forthwith.
7. Present revision petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:014812
CRR-272-2025 (O&M) -4-
8. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of accordingly.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
31.01.2025
Neha
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
