Roshan Lal Vs Ashwani Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Criminal Revision No. 184 of 2024 Date of Decision: 05.08.2024

_______________________________________________________ Roshan Lal …….Petitioner Versus
Ashwani Sharma … Respondent
_______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹
For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohan Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate.
_______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶4

Instant Revision Petition filed under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to judgment dated 12.01.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh (Camp at Karsog) in Cr. Appeal No. 42 of 2023, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 23.01.2023 and order of sentence dated 23.02.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh in criminal complaint No.95 of 2019, whereby learned trial Court, while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under S. 138 of the Negotiable

¶5

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

¶6

2

¶7

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.1,30,000/- to the respondentcomplainant ( hereinafter, ‘complainant’).

¶8

Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that the respondent-complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act in the competent Court of law, alleging therein that cheque bearing No.139972, dated 05.02.2019, amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-, drawn on H.P. State Co-operative Bank, Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, having been issued by the petitioner-accused towards discharge of his lawful liability was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the bank account of the accused. Since, despite having received legal notice, accused failed to make the payment good well within stipulated time, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act in the competent Court of law, which subsequently, 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 accordinigly convicted and sentenced him as per description given herein above.

¶9

Though, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned trial

¶10

3

¶11

Court, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P.(camp at Karsog), but same was dismissed. 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.

¶12

Before the case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merit, petitioner has entered into the compromise with the respondent-complainant, whereby they have resolved to settle their dispute amicably interse them. On account of the compromise, petitioner filed an application bearing Cr.MP No.3203 of 2024, under Section 147 of the Act, praying therein for compounding the offence.

¶13

Today, during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the petitioner states that the petitioner has entered into the compromise with the respondent-complainant, whereby they have resolved to settle their dispute amicably. He states that sum of Rs. 74,000/- has been already paid to the complainant, whereas sum of Rs. 26000/- lying deposited with the learned trial Court can be ordered to be released in favour of the respondent-complainant and thereafter this Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, may proceed to compound the

¶14

4

¶15

offence and acquit the accused of charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act.

¶16

Respondent-Complainant Ashwani Sharma, who is present in Court, states on oath before this Court that he of his own volition and without there being any external pressure has entered into the compromise with the petitioner. He states that he has already received sum of Rs. 74,000/- from the petitioner and in case sum of Rs. 26000/- lying deposited with the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in his favour, he shall have no objection in compounding the offence and acquitting the petitioner-accused of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. His statement is taken on record.

¶17

Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of compensation has been agreed to be paid to the respondentcomplainant and respondent-complainant 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 Court in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 , wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising

¶18

5

¶19

power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction.

¶20

Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by the courts below are 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.

¶21

Since complainant was compelled to engage in unwarranted litigation with the accused for realization of his own amount, petitioner-accused is directed to deposit 5% of the cheque amount with the H.P. State Legal Service Authority as compounding fee within a period of four weeks, failing which, he shall render himself liable for penal consequences as well as contempt of the Court.

¶22

Learned trial Court is directed to release the amount lying deposited with it in favour of the respondent-complainant on its filing appropriate application.

¶23

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

¶24

August 05,2024 (shankar)

Roshan Lal v. Ashwani Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roshan Lal v. Ashwani Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Atul Shukla Vs Som Kumar

Ashish Sharma Vs State of Hp

Shankar Singh Vs State of Hp and Another

Mohammad Faisal Vs State of Hp and Others

Krishan Dutt Vs Kundan Singh Diwan and another

State of Hp Vs Milap Chand