Allowed

Sunil Chand Chopra v. Jitender Singh and another

Himachal Pradesh HC5 Aug 2022CR.R/22/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition for compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act since the matter was amicably settled and dues paid. The court quashed the conviction and sentence, retained part of the deposited amount as fee, and refunded the balance.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence quashed; offence compounded; 25% of deposited sum retained as fee; balance refunded.

Sunil Chand Chopra Vs Jitender Singh and another — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

ON THE 5^th DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION No.22 of 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

SUNEEL CHAND CHOPRA, SON OF SHRI SHER SINGH CHOPRA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MEWAG, POST OFFICE KAMLA NAGAR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.

¶8

….PETITIONER.

¶9

(BY. MR. AJAY SHANDIL, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND

¶11

1. JITENDER SINGH, SON OF SHRI ROSHAN LAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE THANA, CHIRGAON, DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P. 2. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.

¶12

….RESPONDENT.

¶13

(BY. MR. AJAY CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE, FOR RESPONDENT NO.1)

¶14

(M/S DINESH THAKUR, SUMESH RAJ, SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATES GENERAL, WITH MR. AMIT KUMAR DHUMAL, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL AND MR.

¶15

¶16

MANOJ BAGGA, ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

¶17

Whether approved for reporting ?¹

¶18

This Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

By way of this Revision Petition, the petitioner has challenged judgment/order, dated 27.04.2019/03.05.2019, passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Case No.84-3 of 2017, titled as jitender Singh Versus Sunil Chand Chopra, which criminal case stood disposed of by the learned Trial Court by sentencing the present petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and also to pay Rs.5,75,000/- as compensation to the complainant, as well as judgment dated 18.10.2019, passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.18-S/10 of 2019, titled as Sh. Suneel Chand Chopra Versus Sh. Jitender Singh, vide which the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was upheld by the learned Appellate Court and the appeal filed by the present petitioner against the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was dismissed.

¶21

¶22

¶23

2. By way of Cr.MP No.2284 of 2022, filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a prayer has been made by the applicant/petitioner/accused for compounding of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act under which he has been convicted, inter alia, on the ground that the matter now stands amicably settled between the applicant/petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant and the amount as was due from the applicant/petitioner/accused to the respondent/complainant, already stands paid to the respondent/complainant. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant submits that as the matter stands amicably settled between the respondent/complainant and the applicant/petitioner/accused, therefore, respondent/complainant has no objection in case prayer so made for compounding of the offence is allowed.

¶24

3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner apprised the Court that in compliance to order dated 09.01.2020, passed by this Court in Cr.M.P. No.119 of 2020, rather than depositing 10% of the cheque amount with the Registry of this Court, the same has been deposited with the Himachal Pradesh Legal Service Authority. Therefore, he prays that an appropriate order be passed with regard

¶25

¶26

to compounding of the offence by ordering 5% of the cheque amount to be the compounding fee with further direction to the Himachal Pradesh State Legal Service Authority to refund back the excess amount of Rs.25,000/- to the petitioner.

¶27

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits in view of said development, it will be in the interest in case this Court exercises its power of compounding the offence in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 Supreme Court Cases 663.

¶28

5 . Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the application filed for compounding the offence, taking into consideration the fact that the matter now stands amicably settled between the parties, the prayer for compounding of the offence is allowed. It is further ordered that out of the amount of Rs.50,000/-, which has been deposited by the petitioner with the Himachal Pradesh Legal Service Authority, 25% be retained as compounding fee and the balance amount be given to the petitioner/accused.

¶29

6 . Accordingly, the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., vide judgment/order dated 27.04.2019/03.05.2019, in Criminal Case

¶30

¶31

No.84-3 of 2017, titled as Jitender Singh Versus Sunil Chand Chopra, as affirmed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, H.P., vide judgment dated 18.10.2019, in Criminal Appeal No.18S/10 of 2019, titled as Sh. Suneel Chand Chpra Versus Sh. Jitender Singh, stands quashed and set aside.

¶32

7. The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

¶33

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶34

August 05, 2022 (Rishi)

Sunil Chand Chopra v. Jitender Singh and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Chand Chopra v. Jitender Singh and another

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

Jawahar Lal Vs Jagdish Chander and Ors.

Gagandeep Singh Vs State of Hp

Pushkarma Vs State of Hp

Jai Ram Chauhan Vs LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

State of Hp Vs Ajay Kumar

Rameshwar Shah Vs N. K. Mahindroo