Uttarakhand High Court
CRLR/71/2022 on 28 January, 2022
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
CRLR No. 71 of 2022
Hon'ble R.C.Khulbe, J.
(The matter is taken up Virtually).
Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the
revisionist.
Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the
State.
Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for
respondent no. 2.
This revision is preferred against the judgment
and order dated 29.11.2021 passed by the First Addl.
Sessions Judge, Roorkee (Haridwar) in Crl. Appeal
No.69 of 2019 and judgment and order dated
15.3.2019 passed by the First J.M. Roorkee, District
Haridwar in Crl. Complaint No.1117 of 2018.
Compounding application (IA 2/22) has been
moved to compound the offence; the complainant/
respondent no.2 is present before the Court through
V.C.; he fairly submitted that he has received all the
amount from the revisionist; he does not want to
pursue the revision; the compounding application is
supported by an affidavit and duly verified by the
respective counsels; the revisionist has already
deposited 15% of cheque amount before the SLSA.
In Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.,
Criminal Appeal No.963 of 2010 (arising out of SLP
(Crl.) No. 6369 of 2007) with Criminal Appeal Nos.
964-966 of 2010 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos.
6370-6372 of 2007), the Apex Court has permitted
compounding of offence between the parties for the
cases falling under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act with certain riders. For the sake of
convenience, relevant portion of the said judgment is
quoted hereinbelow: -
""With regard to the progression of litigation in
cheque bouncing cases, the learned Attorney General has
urged this Court to frame guidelines for a graded scheme of
imposing costs on parties who unduly delay compounding of
the offence. It was submitted that the requirement of deposit of
the costs will act as a deterrent for delayed composition, since
at present, free and easy compounding of offences at any
stage, however belated, gives an incentive to the drawer of the
cheque to delay settling the cases for years. An application for
compounding made after several years not only results in the
system being burdened but the complainant is also deprived of
effective justice. In view of this submission, we direct that the
following guidelines be followed:
(i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows:
(a) That directions can be given that the writ of
summons be suitably modified making it clear to
the accused that he could make an application for
compounding may be allowed by the Court
without imposing any costs on the accused.
(b) If the accused does not make an application for
compounding as aforesaid, then if an application
for compounding is made before the Magistrate at
a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed
of the cheque amount to be deposited as a
condition for compounding with the Legal Services
Authority, or such authority as the court deems fit.
(c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is
made before the Sessions Court of a High Court in
revision or appeal, such compounding may be
allowed on the condition that the accused pays
15% of the cheque amount by way of costs.
(d) Finally, if the application for compounding is
made before the Supreme Court, the figure would
increase to 20% of the cheque amount."
In the light of abovementioned case, the
revision is allowed. The judgments and orders, under
challenge, are quashed and set aside.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of
accordingly.
(R.C.Khulbe, J.)
(Vacation Court)
28.01.2022
Kaushal
