Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Santosh Devi Tibra W/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 19 April, 2022
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7699/2019
1. Smt. Santosh Devi Tibra W/o Shri Suresh Kumar Tibra,
Proprietor M/s Goyal Industries, R/o House No.278, Arya
Nagar, Nearby Mataji Murlipura, Jaipur.
2. M/s Goyal Industries, Through Proprietor Smt. Santosh
Devi Tibra W/o Shri Suresh Kumar Tibra, House No.278,
Arya Nagar, Near Mataji Mandir, Murlipura, Jaipur, Raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Virendra Haldiya S/o Shri Damodar Praad Haldiya, R/o
Plot No.41, Sundar Nagar, Girdhar Marg, Malviya Nagar,
Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Goyal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP.
Mr. Prahlad Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
Judgment reserved on : 13/04/2022
Date of Pronouncement : 19/04/2022
1. By way of this criminal miscellaneous petition, petitioners
pray to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 11.11.2019
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Women Atrocities
Act Cases No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan in Criminal Revision
No.122/2019 (CIS No.1499/2019) titled as Virendra Haldia Vs.
Smt. Santosh Devi and Anr. By which the revision was partly
allowed against the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by learned
Special Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act, Cases) No.4, Jaipur
Metropolitan.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Revisional Court has wrongly granted interest at the rate of 9%.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-7699/2019]
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have
submitted bank draft of Rs.1 lac on the first date of hearing.
Hon'ble Apex Court in various pronouncements stated that if
payment is made on the first date of hearing, then Court should
have closed the proceedings in NI Act Cases. Consent of the
complainant is not required. So, order passed by the Revisional
Court for granting interest at the rate of 9%, be set aside.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the
judgments passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar
S Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.; Criminal Appeal No.963 of
2010 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos.6369 of 2007), decided
on 03.05.2010 and M/s. Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd &
Anr. Vs. Kanchan Mehta; Criminal Appeal No.1731 of 2017
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5451 of
2017), decided on 05.10.2017.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the
Revisional Court has rightly awarded the interest at the rate of
9%. So, order of the Revisional Court does not suffer from any
infirmity or illegality. So, the criminal miscellaneous petition filed
by the petitioners be dismissed.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and
learned counsel for the respondent.
6. It is an admitted position that the complainant had filed a
complaint against the petitioners under Section 138, NI Act for
dishonor of cheque of Rs.1 lac on the first date of hearing.
Petitioners had submitted the draft of Rs.1 lac and learned trial
Court vide order dated 09.08.2019, dropped the proceedings
under Section 258 Cr.P.C. against the petitioners. Complainant
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-7699/2019]
had filed revision petition against the said order and Revisional
Court had granted interest at the rate of 9% from the date of
03.01.2017 to 02.08.2019. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
M/s. Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd & Anr. Vs. Kanchan
Mehta; Criminal Appeal No.1731 of 2017 (Arising out of
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5451 of 2017) has stated
that offence related to Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, Court
may compound the offence even in the absence of complainant. If
the Court is satisfied to the fact that the complainant has duly
compensated, the Court may close the proceedings and discharge
the accused. As per above pronouncements, Hon'ble Apex Court
clearly stated that complainant should have duly been
compensated. In the present case, Revisional Court had granted
the interest at the rate of 9%.
7. In my considered opinion, interest at the rate of 9% is ex-
cessive, it should be 6% per annum. Order of the Rivisional Court
is modified to the extent for granting interest at the rate of 9%
per annum to 6% per annum from the date of 03.01.2017 to
02.08.2019.
8. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition stands
disposed of with the above direction.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Seema/18
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
