Allowed

Ajay Singh v. M/S Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Limited

Himachal Pradesh HC1 Jan 2024CR.R/553/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conviction under Section 138 NI Act for cheque dishonour was challenged in revision. Parties settled the matter; the court permitted compounding under Section 147 NI Act, acquitted the accused, subject to deposit of 8% cheque amount as compounding fee by 31.3.2024, failing which conviction revives.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; accused acquitted on compounding under S. 147 NI Act, subject to deposit of 8% of cheque amount as compounding fee; deposited amount released to co

Ajay Singh Vs M/S Mahindra and Mahindra Finance… — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

Criminal Revision No.553 of 2023 Decided on : 01.01.2024

¶3

Ajay Singh …Petitioner Versus M/s Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Ltd. …Respondent

¶4

Coram

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For the respondent : Ms. Seema K. Guleria, Advocate.

¶8

Virender Singh, Judge (oral)

¶9

Petitioner-Ajay Singh has filed the present revision petition against the judgment dated 29.09.2023, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una, District Una (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No.69/2022, titled as Ajay Singh versus M/s Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Limited.

¶10

By way of judgment dated 29.09.2023, the learned First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal

¶11

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶12

¶13

filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction order of sentence dated 17.6.2022, passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Una, District Una, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Complaint Case No.97-II-17/2015, titled as M/s Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Limited versus Ajay Singh.

¶14

Vide judgment of conviction order of sentence dated 17.06.2022, learned trial Court has convicted the petitioner, for the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NI Act’) and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of one year and to pay a compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-, to the complainant-Bank.

¶15

After dismissal of the appeal by the learned First Appellate Court, the present revision petition has been preferred.

¶16

During the pendency of the revision petition, before this Court, the matter has been settled between the parties. In this regard, the petitioner has filed an application, under Section 147 of the NI Act, bearing Cr.MP

¶17

¶18

No.4914 of 2023, with a prayer to permit the parties to compound the offence, on the ground that the matter has been settled with regard to Cheque No.460398 dated 1.7.2015.

¶19

It has also been mentioned in the application that accused has deposited a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-, before the learned trial Court and according to the petitioner, he has no objection, if the said amount is released in favour of the complainant-Company.

¶20

Today, accused, as well as, authorized representative of the respondent-Company are present before this Court. The authorized-representative of the complainant-Company, on oath, has specifically stated with regard to the manner, in which, the complainantCompany has filed complaint against the accused, which resulted into his conviction and sentence. Thereafter, the accused had preferred the appeal to assail the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which has also been dismissed. According to him, now the matter has been settled between the parties, vide compromise Annexure A-1. The authorized representative has also deposed that

¶21

¶22

the settled amount, except the amount deposited by the accused before the learned trial Court i.e. Rs.1,50,000/-, has been received by the complainant-Company. He has also prayed that the amount deposited before the learned trial Court be released in favour of the complainant Company. In view of the above, he has made no objection, if the petition is allowed, as prayed for.

¶23

Accused is also present before this Court. He has deposed that he has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.6.2022. Against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, he had filed the appeal before the learned First Appellate Court and the learned First Appellate Court has also dismissed his appeal. Now, he is before this Court, in the present revision petition.

¶24

In addition to this, the accused has also submitted that during the pendency of the revision petition, the matter has been compromised between him and the complainant vide Compromise Annexure A-1. According to him, he has no objection, if the amount of

¶25

¶26

Rs.1,50,000/-, deposited before the learned trial Court is released in favour of the respondent-Company.

¶27

Apart from this, it has also been stated, that he is a heart patient and is not in a position to deposit the compounding fee. As such, some relaxation, in the compounding fee, may kindly be given to him and longer time has also been sought to deposit the requisite compounding fee.

¶28

According to the petitioner, in case, he fails to deposit the compounding fee, on or before 31^st March, 2024, the revision petition, may be treated as dismissed and in that eventuality, the applicant will surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court.

¶29

Since, the matter, with regard to cheque No.460398, dated 1.7.2015, has been settled between the parties, as such, the application, bearing Cr.MP No.4914 of 2023, is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence.

¶30

Considering the fact that the application for compounding of the offence has been allowed, the present

¶31

¶32

petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.06.2022, passed by learned trial Court in Complaint Case No.97-II-17/2015, which has been affirmed by learned First Appellate Court, in Criminal Appeal No.69/2022, vide judgment dated 29.09.2023, are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 NI Act. His personal and surety bonds are cancelled and discharged.

¶33

However, this order shall be, subject to deposit

¶34

of 8% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee, with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, on or before 31^st March, 2024.

¶35

It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, on or before 31.3.2024, then, the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 17.6.2022, passed by learned trial Court and in that eventuality, he shall surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court.

¶36

¶37

Learned trial Court is directed to release the

¶38

amount, so deposited by the petitioner, in favour of complainant-respondent, on production of the copy of this judgment, as well as, on furnishing of particulars of the Bank account.

¶39

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any,

¶40

shall also stand disposed of.

¶41

( Virender Singh ) Judge

¶42

January 01, 2023 (ps)

Ajay Singh v. M/S Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Singh v. M/S Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Service Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Kiran Sharma Vs State of Hp

Kamlesh Thakur Vs Harish Verma

Kamaljeet Kaur Vs State of Hp

Shastra i.e., Society for Health and Social Transformation Rehabilitation Vs Kimtu Devi

Manmeet Singh Vs State of Hp