Allowed

Amar Ashok Tuemkar v. Pundalik Dattaram Amonkar and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Aug 2024CRIR/22/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Goa accepted a Criminal Revision application to compound an offence under Section 138 NI Act after parties settled. The full compensation amount was deposited. The substantive sentence was quashed, and permission to compound was granted under Sections 138 and 147 NI Act.

What did the court decide?

Compounding of offence granted; substantive sentence quashed; compensation deposited.

Amar Ashok Tuemkar Vs Pundalik Dattaram Amonkar and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

CRIR 22 of 2022

¶2

2024:BHC-GOA:1354

¶3

Sonam

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.22 OF 2022 WITH CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.51 OF 2022

¶6

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.22 OF 2022 AMAR ASHOK TUEMKAR ... APPLICANT Versus

¶7

PUNDALIK DATTARAM AMONKAR AND ANR ... RESPONDENTS

¶8

WITH CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.51 OF 2022 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.22 OF 2022 AMAR ASHOK TUEMKAR ... APPLICANT Versus PUNDALIK DATTARAM AMONKAR AND ANR ... RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr. Ganesh Naik, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶10

Ms. Kavita Naik, Advocate for Respondent No. 1.

¶11

Mr. Gaurish Nagvenker, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶12

CORAM:- BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED :- 19th August, 2024

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

Mr. Ganesh Naik, appears for the Applicant and Ms. Kavita Naik appears for the Respondent No. 1.

¶15

An application is filed for compounding of the offence on the ground that the parties have settled their disputes outside the Court. The entire amount, as awarded by the Appellate Court, is

Page 1 of 3

19th August, 2024

CRIR 22 of 2022

deposited/paid.

Mr. Naik appearing for the Applicant submits that today the Applicant has produced a Demand Draft in the name of Registrar of High Court of Bombay at Goa for Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) which is towards the amount of 15% of the cheque as directed by the Apex Court in the case of Damodar Prabhu Vs Sayed Babalal, reported in (2010)5 SCC 663 for compounding of the offence.

¶21

Respondent No. 1 is present in person along with the Advocate and agreed that he has no objection for compounding of the said offence. Accordingly, the joint application signed by the Applicant and the Respondent No. 1 is placed on record and marked 'X' for identification.

¶22

The Applicant was charged under Section 138 of the NI Act before the learned Magistrate. After the trial, the learned Magistrate, found the Applicant guilty for the said offence and accordingly sentenced him for imprisonment, as well as to pay compensation to the complainant.

¶23

The Appeal filed before the Appellate Court was dismissed, thereby confirming the sentence awarded by the learned Magistrate. Thereafter, a Revision is made before this Court.

Page 2 of 3

19th August, 2024

CRIR 22 of 2022

Since the parties have settled the dispute, permission could be granted to compound the offence.

¶28

The Applicant has deposited the balance amount of Rs. 70,000/(Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) before this Court. The Registry is directed to transfer the said amount of Rs.70,000/- in the account of Respondent No. 1. The Respondent No.1 shall provide his bank details to the Registry accordingly.

¶29

The Demand Draft of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) is accepted towards the compensation charges. Registry is directed to transfer this amount of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) to the account of Goa State Legal Services Authority.

¶30

The compounding application is therefore accepted. Accordingly, substantive sentence awarded by the Court stands quashed and set aside and permission is granted to the parties to compound the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, read with Section 147 of the NI Act.

¶31

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.

¶32

BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J.

¶33

Page 3 of 3

¶34

19th August, 2024

Amar Ashok Tuemkar v. Pundalik Dattaram Amonkar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Ashok Tuemkar v. Pundalik Dattaram Amonkar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Bhandari and Anr. Vs Samir D. Kamat and Anr.

Ankush Rama Arlekar (Dec) Thr. Lrs. Vs Mary Dsouza @ Mary Santamaria and Anr.

John Pascoal Dias Thr. Poa Janice Maria Perpetua Dias Vs the Chief Secretary and 4 Ors.

Amar Ashok Tuemkar Vs Pundalik Dattaram Amonkar and Anr.

Frederick Pereira, Thr. His Attorney, Antonio Pereira., Vs the State of Goa, Thr. Public Prosecutor and Anr.

Vishwanath Lal Vs Joseph Felizardo Graciano Barreto