Allowed

Baldev Singh Brakta v. Yashpal

Himachal Pradesh HC7 Mar 2023CR.R/38/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HC of HP allowed temporary petition challenging conviction for cheque bounce. Court accepted inter-party compromise with full compensation paid and directed quashing of conviction, acquittal of petitioner, and discharge of bail bonds under Section 147 NI Act.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; offence compounded under Section 147 NI Act; conviction quashed; accused acquitted; bail bonds discharged; ordered release of deposited compensation to complainant.

Baldev Singh Brakta Vs Yashpal — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

Criminal Revision No.38 of 2023 Date of Decision: 7.03.2023

¶3

_______________________________________________________ Baldev Singh Brakta …….Petitioner Versus
Yash Pal … Respondent
_______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kumar Lahota, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sunil Kumar Banyal, Advocate.
_______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶4

Instant petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C, lays challenge to judgment dated 26.11.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge(CBI) Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in Cr. Appeal No. 24-R/10 of 2022, affirming judgment of conviction dated 18.01.2022 and order of sentence dated 20.01.2022 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in criminal case No.36/03 of 2021, titled as “Yash Pal vs. Sh. Baldev Singh Brakta”, whereby learned trial Court while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted and sentenced him to undergo

¶5

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶6

¶7

simple imprisonment for a period of one year and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- to the respondent-complainant

¶8

( hereinafter, ‘complainant’).

¶9

Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short Act) in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., alleging therein that accused had purchased apple boxes from him for a consideration of Rs.3,60,260/- and accused with a view to discharge his legal liability, issued three cheques i.e. cheque No.000173, dated 24.08.2020, amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-, cheque No.000169, dated 24.08.2020, amounting to Rs.1,09,360/and cheque No.000168, dated 20.08.2020, amounting Rs. 1, 50,000/- respectively, in his favour. However, fact remains that on presentation aforesaid cheques were dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the account of the accused and as such, complainant was compelled to issue statutory notice to the accused calling upon him to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the notice. Since, the accused despite having received notice, failed to make the payment good, complainant was compelled to

¶10

¶11

initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act in the competent court of law.

¶12

Learned trial court on the basis of evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S. 138 of Act and convicted and sentenced him as per description given herein above.

¶13

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned trial Court, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (CBI) Shimla , District Shimla, H.P., Learned Additional Sessions Judge(CBI)Shimla modified the judgment of trial Court vide judgment 26.11.2022 and reduced the amount of compensation to Rs.4,25,000/-. In the aforesaid background, accused has approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by both the learned Courts below.

¶14

Vide order dated 16.01.2023, this court suspended the substantive sentence imposed upon the accused by learned trial Court, subject to the petitioner-accused furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 30,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

¶15

¶16

Today, during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the petitioner has placed on record compromise arrived interse petitioner and the respondent-complainant, perusal whereof reveals that sum of Rs. 3,25,000/- has been paid to the complainant by the accused, whereas sum of Rs.1,00,000/- lying deposited in the trial Court has been agreed to be released in favour of the respondent/complainant.

¶17

Mr. Sunil Kumar Banyal, learned counsel representing the respondent-complainant while fairly acknowledging the factum with regard to aforesaid compromise arrived interse parties, submits that since respondent/complainant has received entire amount of compensation awarded by learned trial court, he shall have no objection in case this Court compounds the offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Compromise, as taken note hereinabove, is taken on record.

¶18

Since both the parties have entered into the compromise and sum of Rs. 3,25,000/-stands already paid to the respondent-complainant coupled with the fact that petitioner has also given his consent to release sum of Rs.1,00,000/- lying deposited in the trial Court in favour of the respondent-complainant, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made of behalf of the petitioner that while exercising power under section 147 of the

¶19

¶20

Negotiable Instruments Ac t. Hon’ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu case, has 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.

¶21

Consequently, in view of above, prayer made on behalf of the accused is allowed and offence committed by him under S.138 of the Act is ordered to be compounded. Judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned courts below are quashed and set aside. Accused is acquitted of the offence under S.138 of the Act. The bail bonds of the accused are ordered to be discharged.

¶22

Learned Court below is directed to release the compensation amount lying deposited with it in favour of the respondent-complainant, by remitting the same in his saving account, details whereof shall be furnished by learned counsel for the respondent- complaint within a period of two weeks.

¶23

In the aforesaid terms, instant petition is disposed of, alongwith all pending applications. Bail bonds, if any, furnished by the accused are discharged.

¶24

March 07,2023 (shankar)

¶25

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

Baldev Singh Brakta v. Yashpal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baldev Singh Brakta v. Yashpal

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

Akshay Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Sumit Kumar Vs State of Hp

Vicky Dogra Vs State of Hp

Surya Partap Thakur Vs State of Hp and Another

Naresh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Makhan Deen Vs State of Hp