Allowed

Babu Lal v. Om Prakash Chauhan

Himachal Pradesh HC14 Jun 2024CR.R/119/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court quashed conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act after parties amicably settled. Petitioner deposited compensation; offence compounded under Section 147. Petitioner acquitted; compensated for litigation charges.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner acquitted; conviction and sentence quashed; offence compounded; compensation and litigation charges directed to be paid to respondent.

Babu Lal Vs Om Prakash Chauhan — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

2024:HHC:3528

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

Cr. Revision No. 119 of 2024 Date of Decision: 14.06.2024

Babu Lal

……...Petitioner

Versus

Om Prakash

…....Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

¶11

For the petitioner: Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Balwant Singh Thakur, Advocate.

¶12

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶13

Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, lays challenge to judgment dated 30.11.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No. 88-S/10 of 2022 affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.11.2022/15.11.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in Complaint Case No. 1-3 of 2017/16, whereby court below, while holding the petitioner-accused held guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘Act’) convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the respondent-complainant.

¶14

Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are

¶15

that respondent-complainant (for short ‘complainant’) filed a complaint

¶16

¶17

under Section 138 of the Act in the competent court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued cheque bearing No. 083881 amounting to Rs. 70,000/- in favour of the complainant, 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, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings before the competent Court of law under Section 138 of the Act.

¶18

Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 05.11.2022/15.11.2022, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as per the description given hereinabove.

¶19

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the learned court below, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Shimla, District Shimla, HP, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 30.11.2023, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present petitioner-accused 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.

¶20

Vide order dated 07.03.2024, this court suspended the substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court below subject to petitioner’s depositing of the compensation amount and furnishing

¶21

¶22

personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-. However, fact remains that the aforesaid order never came to be complied with in its letter and spirit.

¶23

Before the case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, petitioner-accused has amicably settled the matter with the complainant, whereby he agreed to pay entire amount of compensation in terms of judgment passed by the court below to the complainant.

¶24

In the aforesaid background, prayer has been made on behalf of petitioner-accused for compounding the offence under Section 147 of the Act, Mr. Lakshay Thakur, learned counsel representing the petitioneraccused submitted that a sum of Rs. 66,650/- stands deposited with the Registry of this Court and a sum of Rs. 33,350/- stands deposited with the court below. He states that entire amount deposited by the petitioneraccused has been agreed to be released in favour of the complainant and as such, this court, while exercising the power under Section 147 of the Act may compound the offence.

¶25

Mr. Balwant Singh Thakur, learned counsel representing the complainant, on instructions of the complainant, who is present in court states that in case entire amount of compensation deposited by the petitioner-accused is ordered to be released in his favour, he shall have no objection in compounding the offence. He further states that since he was unnecessarily dragged into the litigation for realization of his own money, some amount may also be ordered to be awarded in his favour on account of litigation charges.

¶26

Since parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter se them and complainant has no objection in compounding the

¶27

¶28

offence, this court finds no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner-accused 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 Cou rt 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.

¶29

Consequently, in view of the discussion made hereinabove as well as law taken into consideration, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 05.11.2022/15.11.2022 and 30.11.2023, 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, are discharged. The petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.

¶30

Registry of this Court as well as trial Court are directed to release the amount lying deposited with them in favour of the complainant by remitting the same in his saving bank account, details whereof, shall be furnished by learned counsel representing the petitioner within one week. Since petitioner was unnecessarily embroiled in litigation for realization of his own money, petitioner-accused is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/to the complainant, as litigation charges, payable within a period of four months, failing which, complainant would be at liberty to get the present

¶31

¶32

petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken

¶33

against the petitioner.

¶34

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge

¶35

June 14, 2024 (sunil)

Babu Lal v. Om Prakash Chauhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Lal v. Om Prakash Chauhan

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

Narayan Dass Chauhan Vs State of Hp and Anr.

Jai Parkash Vs Rakesh Kumar

Tahseen Gul Vs State of Hp

Ashima Kashiv Vs State of Hp

Dheeraj Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Shankar Saroj Vs State Bank of India