Allowed

Balwant Singh v. Chaman Sharma

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Dec 2022CR.R/28/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Himachal Pradesh quantified a criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C. challenging conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that full compensation was paid and the complainant agreed to compound the offence. Relying on Section 147 of the Act and Damodar S. Prabhu, the court quashed the judgments and acquitted the p

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgments of conviction and sentence are quashed, the petitioner-accused is acquitted of charges under Section 138, and interim order is vacated.

Balwant Singh Vs Chaman Sharma — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

Cr.R. No. 28 of 2022 Date of Decision: 15.12.2022 _____________________________________________________________________

¶3

Balwant Singh Chaman Sharma Coram

¶4

……...Petitioner Versus …....Respondent

¶5

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Mohit Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Pushpender, Advocate vice Mr. Kulbhushan Sharma, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________

¶6

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶7

Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 of Cr.PC, lays challenge to judgment dated 3.1.2022, passed by the learned Sessions Judge (Forest), Shimla, in Criminal Appeal No. 25-R/10 of 2021, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 6/22.3.2021, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Case No. RBT 521/03 of 2019/2018, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the petitioner-accused guilty

¶8

¶9

of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the “Act"), convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,25,000/- to the complainant.

¶10

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent-complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in the court of learned ACJM-I Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued a cheque No. 580436 dated 30.11.2017 amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/-, but fact remains that aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured. Since petitioner-accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, respondent/complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings before the competent Court of law under Section 138 of the Act.

¶11

3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 6/22.3.2021, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, sentenced him as per the description given herein above.

¶12

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the court below, accused preferred an appeal in the

¶13

¶14

court of learned Sessions Judge (Forests) Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, HP., which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 3.1.2022, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present petitioneraccused has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below.

¶15

5. Vide order dated 12.1.2022, this Court while suspending the substantive sentence imposed by the court below, directed the accused to deposit 50% of the compensation amount. Though aforesaid order never came to be complied with, but today during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the respondent/complainant while placing on record compromise, whereby both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter-se them, submits that since entire amount of compensation awarded by the court below has been received by the complainant, he does not wish to prosecute the case further and shall have no objection in case, prayer made by the petitioner-accused for compounding of offence is accepted and he is acquitted of the charges framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Aforesaid compromise is taken on record and exhibited as Ex.C-1.

¶16

¶17

6. Learned counsel for the parties fairly state that since entire amount of compensation stands received by the complainant, this Court while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act can proceed to accept the prayer made in the instant petition for compounding of offence and acquit the accused of charges framed against him under 138 of the Act.

¶18

7. Having taken note of the fact that since entire amount of compensation stands paid to the respondent-complainant and respondent has no objection in compounding the offence, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for compounding of offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Cour t in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 , wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction by the courts below.

¶19

8. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 6.3.2021/22.3.2021 and 3.1.2022, passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, discharged. Since petitioner-accused is lodged at Central

¶20

¶21

Jail Kanda, release warrants be prepared accordingly and sent through Fax/Email to the Superintendent of Central Jail, Kanda, immediately. The petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.

¶22

December 15, 2022 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge

Balwant Singh v. Chaman Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Singh v. Chaman Sharma

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

Leela Devi Vs State of Hp

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Maya Devi and Others

Ranjeet Singh Vs State of Hp

Suresh Kumar Verma Vs State

Seema Devi Vs Anoop Kumar and Others

Tota Ram Vs State of Hp and Others