Allowed

Rama Nand v. Shiv Ram

Himachal Pradesh HC5 Jul 2024CR.R/235/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed criminal revision in cheque bounce case where parties compromised post-conviction. Court quashed impugned judgments, acquitted accused, and ordered payment of compounding fee to Legal Services Authority.

What did the court decide?

Quashment of conviction and sentence judgments; acquittal of petitioner; discharge of bail; release of interim money; direction to pay compounding fee.

Rama Nand Vs Shiv Ram — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

2024:HHC:4659

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

Cr. Revision No.235 of 2024 Date of Decision: 05.07.2024

¶4

_____________________________________________________________________ Rama Nand ……...Petitioner Versus Shiv Ram

……...Petitioner

…....Respondent

Coram

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

¶9

For the Petitioner: Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Praveen Sharma, Advocate.

¶10

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶11

Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., lays challenge to judgment dated 11.01.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.20-T/10 of 2023, titled Rama Nand Vs. Shiv Ram , affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01.04.2023/11.04.2023, respectively, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theog, Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Case No.51-III/2018, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the

¶12

¶13

petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘ accused ’) guilty 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.7,00,000/- to the complainant.

¶14

Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent-complainant (hereinafter, ‘ complainant ’) instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theog, Shimla, H.P., alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued Cheque for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-, 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.

¶15

Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record

¶16

by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 01.04.2023/11.04.2023, 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.

¶17

¶18

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the Court below, accused preferred an appeal in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 11.01.2024, 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.

¶19

Before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, parties have entered into compromise, whereby petitioner/accused has agreed to pay Rs.6,00,000/- to the respondent/complainant in lumpsum, which offer has been happily agreed by respondent/complainant. After entering into aforesaid agreement, petitioner/accused has filed an application bearing Cr.MP No.2491/2024 under Section 147 of the Act, praying therein for compounding of offence, alleged to have been committed by him, under Section 138 of the Act.

¶20

While fairly acknowledging factum with regard to compromise arrived inter se parties, Mr. Praveen Sharma, Advocate, while putting in appearance on behalf of respondent/complainant states that since sum of

¶21

¶22

Rs.6,00,000/- has been agreed to be paid and such offer has been acceptable to respondent/complainant, he shall have no objection in compounding the offence. He states that sum of Rs.3,00,000/- has been deposited in the bank account of respondent/complainant and Rs.1,60,000/- has been paid in cash, whereas, sum of Rs.1,40,000/- has been agreed to be released, in favour of the petitioner, which is lying before the learned Court below.

¶23

Having taken note of the fact that parties have compromised the matter, whereby petitioner/accused has agreed to pay Rs.6,00,000/- as lump-sum amount, coupled with the fact that Rs.4,60,000/- already stands paid to the respondent/complainant and balance amount of Rs.1,40,000/- is lying deposited with the learned Court below, 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

¶24

Cour t in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 ,

¶25

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.

¶26

¶27

Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 11.01.2024 and 01.04.2023/11.04.2023, 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. Needless to say, amount, if any, lying deposited with the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent-complainant by remitting the same in his saving bank account, detail whereof shall be furnished by his counsel within one week.

¶28

Petitioner/accused is also directed to pay 5% of the Cheque amount, as compounding fee with the Himachal Pradesh State Legal Services Authority within a period of eight weeks. It is made clear that in case, aforesaid amount is not paid within the time stipulated by this Court, accused besides rendering himself liable for penal consequences, would also invite contempt proceedings. The petition is disposed of, along with pending applications, if any.

¶29

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

¶30

July 05, 2024 (Rajeev Raturi)

Rama Nand v. Shiv Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rama Nand v. Shiv Ram

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

Valister Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Jagbir Vs Sandeep Mehta

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Vs Kubja Devi

Ajay Verma Vs State of Hp and Another

Nitish Kumar Vs Neha Kumari