Quashed

Ranjeet @Jeet v. Ravi Kant

Himachal Pradesh HC7 Aug 2024CR.R/484/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court compounded the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after conviction, relying on a compromise between the parties. The impugned judgments of conviction and sentence were set aside, and the petitioner was acquitted upon release of deposited compensation to the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Acquittal of petitioner-accused; compounding of offence under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Ranjeet @Jeet Vs Ravi Kant — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

2024:HHC:6501

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

Criminal Revision No. 484 of 2024

¶4

Date of Decision: 07.08.2024

¶5

________________________________________ Ranjeet @ Jeet Versus	_______________ …….Petitioner
Ravi Kant	… Respondent
________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹	_______________

¶6

For the Petitioner: Mr. H.S.Rangra, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Advocate.
_______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶7

Instant Revision Petition filed under Section 438/442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, lays challenge to judgment dated 03.06.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Appeal No. 25 of 2024, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.01.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.3, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh in criminal complaint No. 62 of 2018, 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, (for short ‘Act’) convicted and sentenced him to

¶8

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

¶9

¶10

2024:HHC:6501

¶11

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5,50,000/- to the respondentcomplainant ( hereinafter, ‘complainant’).

¶12

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.008958, dated 23.09.2017, amounting to Rs.3,20,000/- drawn on IDBI Bank, Mandi, 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.

¶13

Though, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned trial Court, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P, but same was dismissed vide

¶14

¶15

2024:HHC:6501

¶16

judgment dated 03.06.2023. 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.

¶17

Vide order dated 31.07.2024, this Court suspended the substantive sentence imposed upon the accused by learned trial Court, subject to the petitioner-accused depositing 50% of the compensation amount and furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

¶18

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.3232 of 2024, under Section 147 of the Act, praying therein for compounding the offence.

¶19

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. 1,45,000/- has been already paid to the complainant, whereas sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- lying deposited with the

¶20

¶21

2024:HHC:6501

¶22

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

¶23

Mr. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel representing the respondent-complainant submits that respondent-complainant shall have no objection in compounding the offence in case, amount lying deposited with the learned trial Court, is ordered to be released in his favour.

¶24

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 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.

¶25

¶26

2024:HHC:6501

¶27

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.

¶28

The petitioner-accused is directed to deposit 2% 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.

¶29

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

¶30

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

¶31

August 07,2024 (shankar)

Ranjeet @Jeet v. Ravi Kant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet @Jeet v. Ravi Kant

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

Dhanpat Vs Smt Bansla Alias Bandana Kumari

Satya Devi Vs Jarman Singh

Gian Bhaik Vs Satish Mehta

State of Hp Vs Prem Singh

M/s Speedup India Multi Trade Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dinesh Chopra

Ajay Pal Vs State of Hp