Muni Lal Vs Lalit Kumar

2024:HHC:8630

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No. 415 of 2022 Date of Decision: 10.09.2024

__________________________________________________________________________ Muni Lal ……...Petitioner Versus Lalit Kumar …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Arun Sehgal, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Sanket Sankhyan, Advocate.

¶5

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶6

Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to judgment dated 29.04.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No. 10/10 of 2021, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 26.07.2021 and order of sentence dated 28.07.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., in criminal complaint No. 71/3 of 2016, whereby learned Court below, while holding petitioner-accused (hereinafter ‘accused’) 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. 6,16,000/- to the respondent-complainant

¶7

(hereinafter ‘complainant).

¶8

Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Act in the

¶9

2024:HHC:8630

¶10

2

¶11

competent Court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued two cheques i.e. cheque bearing No. 843681 dated 14.01.2016 amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/- and cheque bearing No. 843683 dated 14.01.2016 amounting to Rs. 2,60,000/-, however, the same were dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the bank account of the petitioner-accused. Since petitioner-accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act before the competent Court of law.

¶12

Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment dated 26.07.2021 and order dated 28.07.2021, held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as per the description given hereinabove.

¶13

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 Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 29.04.2022, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present 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.

¶14

Vide order dated 08.08.2022, this Court suspended the substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court below subject to

¶15

2024:HHC:8630

¶16

3

¶17

petitioner’s depositing 50% of the compensation amount and furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- within a period of four weeks.

¶18

In terms of aforesaid order passed by this Court, accused has deposited the 50% of the compensation amount with the learned trial Court.

¶19

Today, during proceedings of the case, learned counsel for the accused, states that accused is ready and willing to make payment of entire compensation amount awarded by the learned Court below. He states that accused has no objection in case, amounts lying deposited with the Registry of this Court as well as learned trial Court are ordered to be released in favour of the complainant, this Court while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act may proceed to compound the offence and acquit the accused from the charge framed against him.

¶20

Mr. Sanket Sankhyan, Advocate, while putting in appearance on behalf of complainant, on instructions, states that in case, entire amount of compensation lying deposited with the learned trial Court as well as Registry of this Court is ordered to be released in favour of the complainant, he shall have no objection in compounding the offence. However, some amount of litigation charges may be awarded in favour of complainant because he was unnecessarily dragged into litigation for realization of his own money.

¶21

Since parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter se them, as has been taken note hereinabove, coupled with the fact that complainant has no objection in compounding the offence, in the event of his being released the amount lying deposited with the Registry of

¶22

2024:HHC:8630

¶23

4

¶24

this Court as well as learned trial Court, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding the 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.

¶25

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.

¶26

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 29.04.2022 & 26.07.2021 and sentence dated 28.07.2021, passed by the learned 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.

¶27

Entire compensation amount deposited by the petitioneraccused with the learned trial Court as well as Registry of this Court is ordered to be released in favour of complainant by remitting the same in his bank account, detail whereof, shall be furnished within a period of one week.

¶28

Since complainant was compelled to engage in unwarranted litigation with the accused for realization of his own amount, accused is directed to deposit 2% of the cheque amount with the HP State Legal Service Authority as compounding fee and Rs. 15,000/- as litigation

¶29

2024:HHC:8630

¶30

5

¶31

charges payable to the complainant within a period of six weeks, failing which, he shall render himself liable for penal consequences as well as contempt of court.

¶32

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge

¶33

September 10, 2024 (Rajeev Raturi)

Muni Lal v. Lalit Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muni Lal v. Lalit Kumar

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

Naina Vs State of Hp

Aditya @Ishu Vs State of Hp

Yogindra Kapoor Vs State of Hp and Another

Rakesh Narnol Vs Khatri Ram and Anr.

Madan Lal @ Vipan Kumar Vs State of Hp and Anr.

Kanti Vijay Singh Vs State of Hp