Disposed

Bhopal Singh v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC9 Dec 2024CRL.M.C./9655/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act were challenged in a revision petition after appellate confirmation. The parties settled for Rs. 2,75,000, paid to respondent No. 2. Following Supreme Court precedent on quashing post-settlement proceedings, the High Court set aside the conviction, sentence and subsequent orders and directed release from jail.

What the court decided

AI extract

Bhopal Singh Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~86

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 9655/2024 & CRL.M.A. 37057/2024 BHOPAL SINGH

¶4

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Montu, Mr. Jagdish Diwakar, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

¶7

.....Respondent

¶8

Through: Mr. Sunil Kr. Gautam, APP Mr. Hemant Pathak, Adv. for Vipin Dilawari, Adv. CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

¶10

O R D E R % 09.12.2024

¶11

CRL.M.A. 37057/2024-EX.

¶12

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

The application stands disposed of.

¶14

CRL.M.C. 9655/2024

¶15

This is a petition seeking setting aside of the order of sentence dated 23.04.2024 passed by the learned MM-01, District North East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in CC No 890/2017 titled as “ The Bhajanpura Co-operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. v. Bhopal Singh” whereby the petitioner has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 months and the same was upheld vide order dated 14.11.2024 in CRL.A. 98/2024 by the learned ASJ in Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.

¶16

The petitioner was convicted for offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), 1881.

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 09:33:32

¶19

The parties have arrived at a settlement dated 04.12.2024, wherein the petitioner has paid the settled amount of Rs. 2,75,000/- through DD No. 103102 dated 29.11.2024 drawn on Axis Bank to the respondent No.2.

¶20

The counsels for the petitioner are present in Court and have filed their Vakalatnama .

¶21

Mr. Pathak, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.2 for and on behalf of Mr. Vipin Dilawari, Advocate (Mobile No. 9312203957) (BCD Enroll. No D/2024/2009).

¶22

The learned counsel state on behalf of respondent No. 2 that they have arrived at the settlement out of their own free will without any threat, pressure, coercion or undue influence. 9. Since it was a complaint case and it has been settled to the satisfaction of the complainant, I am satisfied that the closure of the proceedings is in the interest of justice and will prevent valuable judicial time.

¶23

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a similar matter in “ Ghanshyam Gautam & Anr. v Usha Rani (Since Deceased) Through LRs,” 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 23 has quashed proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act,1881 wherein the appellant was convicted and was further sentenced. The operative portion reads as under:-

¶24

“4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that once the settlement has been arrived at and the complainant has signed the deed accepting a particular amount in full and final settlement of the default amount and the fine amount awarded by the Trial Court, the proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act need to be quashed.”

¶25

Since the matter has been settled and since the respondent No.2 has no objection to quashing the complaint and subsequent orders passed by the

¶26

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 09:33:32

¶27

learned Trial Court (including the order on sentence) upheld in the appellate Court, the same is set aside and it is directed that the petitioner be released from jail.

¶28

Copy of this order be supplied to the Jail Superintendent, Mandoli Jail.

¶29

The 20% of the compensation has already been deposited with the appellate Court. The said amount can be released to the respondent No.2 through authorized counsel/ representative, for which the petitioner has no objection.

¶30

The petition is disposed of.

¶31

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶32

DECEMBER 9, 2024 / (MS)

¶33

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶34

Bhopal Singh v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Bhopal Singh v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mushtaq Ahmad Lone @ Mushtaq Aalam Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Pooja Manna Vs State NCT of Delhi

Pankaj Ahuja Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Aman Kumar & Anr. Vs State through SHO Ps Govindpuri & Anr.

Ajay & Ors. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Nadeem Vs State