Dismissed

Narender Singh v. State Bank of India

Himachal Pradesh HC2 Sept 2024CRMMO/699/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's petition under Section 528 BNSS to quash the Trial Court's order refusing his application to deposit the cheque amount. The Court held that depositing only the principal without interest and costs does not constitute adequate compensation, and compounding requires complainant consent which was absent.

What the court decided

AI extract

Narender Singh Vs State Bank of India — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:7726 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

Cr. MMO No. 699 of 2024 Reserved on: 05.08.2024 Date of Decision: 2.09.2024

¶4

Narinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State Bank of India ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla , Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan, Advocate.

¶5

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

¶6

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing and setting aside the order dated 03.06.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur (learned Trial Court) in Complaint No.143 of 2021 titled State Bank of India versus Narender Singh. It has been asserted that the complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short ‘NI Act’) before the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court

¶7

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶8

¶9

¶10

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:7726 )

¶11

summoned the accused/petitioner. Notice of accusation was put to the accused/petitioner. He pleaded not guilty. The matter was listed for arguments. The petitioner preferred an application for depositing the cheque amount. The complainant filed a reply to the application. The learned Trial Court dismissed the application. The order passed by the learned Trial Court is bad because the petitioner is ready to make the payment of the cheque amount. The learned Trial Court violated the basic principle of law by dismissing the application. The purpose of the application was to avoid unnecessary harassment; therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the order passed by the learned Trial Court be set aside.

¶12

I have heard Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner who submitted that the petitioner intended to deposit the amount before the learned Trial Court and he had filed the application for this purpose. Learned Trial Court erred in dismissing the application. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the order passed by the learned Trial Court be set aside. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Private

¶13

¶14

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:7726 )

¶15

Limited versus Kanchan Mehta, 2018 (1) SCC 560 in support of his submission.

¶16

I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.

¶17

A perusal of the complaint (Annexure P1) shows that it was filed in the year 2021. The matter was listed for arguments when the application was filed for depositing the cheque amount. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments (supra) that where the cheque amount with interest and cost as assessed by the Court is paid by a specified date, the Court is entitled to close the proceedings in exercise of its power under Section 143 of the NI Act read with Section 258 of Cr.P.C. The Hon’ble Supreme Court issued a direction to the Courts to mention the specified amount in the summons, which should be assessed by the Court having regard to the cheque amount and interest/cost by a specified date. It was further held that if the accused deposits the amount, the Court will close the proceedings. It is not the case of the petitioner that the amount was assessed by the Court and the application was filed for depositing the amount before the specified date; therefore, the

¶18

¶19

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:7726 )

¶20

judgment in Meters and Instruments (supra) does not apply to the present case.

¶21

The application mentions that the present petitioner is ready to make the payment of ₹ 49,512/-, however, the complainant was not accepting this amount and was unnecessarily harassing the petitioner. This application was opposed by filing a reply asserting that the amount was not deposited with the Bank and the application was filed at the stage of the arguments to prolong the proceedings. This reply shows that the complainant had not agreed to compromise the matter and the complaint could not have been compounded without the consent of the complainant. It was laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in JIK Industries Ltd. v. Amarlal V. Jumani, (2012) 3 SCC 255 : (2012) 2 SCC (Civ) 82 : (2012) 2 SCC (Cri) 125: 2012 SCC OnLine SC 104 that the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act cannot be compounded without the consent of the complainant. It was observed:

¶22

“82. A perusal of Section 320 makes it clear that the provisions contained in Section 320 and the various subsections is a code by itself relating to compounding of offence. It provides for the various parameters and procedures and guidelines in the matter of compounding. If this Court upholds the contention of the appellant that

¶23

¶24

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:7726 )

¶25

as a result of the incorporation of Section 147 in the NI Act, the entire gamut of procedure of Section 320 of the Code is made inapplicable to the compounding of an offence under the NI Act, in that case, the compounding of an offence under the NI Act will be left totally unguided or uncontrolled. Such an interpretation apart from being an absurd or unreasonable one will also be contrary to the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Code, which has been discussed above. There is no other statutory procedure for compounding of offence under the NI Act. Therefore, Section 147 of the NI Act must be reasonably construed to mean that as a result of the said section the offences under the NI Act are made compoundable, but the main principle of such compounding, namely, the consent of the person aggrieved or the person injured or the complainant cannot be wished away nor can the same be substituted by virtue of Section 147 of the NI Act .” (emphasis supplied)

¶26

The complainant had specifically mentioned in Para 10 of the complaint that if the accused made the payment of ₹ 49,512/-, cheque amount plus future interest plus the cost of ₹ 10,000/-, the bank would not pursue the complaint. It does not appear that the amount mentioned in para 10 of the complaint was deposited immediately after the appearance by the present petitioner. The petitioner chose to contest the matter and at the stage of the arguments he filed an application for the payment of ₹ 49,512/- and not the cost and the interest, which he was liable to pay as per the judgments in Meters and Instruments

¶27

¶28

Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:7726 )

¶29

(supra); therefore, the learned Trial Court was justified in not allowing the application.

¶30

It was submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that if the Court is satisfied that the complainant has been adequately compensated, it can close the proceedings. This part of the judgment will not assist the petitioner because by depositing the cheque amount only and not the interest and the cost that the complainant had to incur for pursuing the complaint, it cannot be said that the complainant was adequately compensated.

¶31

Consequently, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Trial Court and no interference is required with the same. Hence, the present petition fails and the same is dismissed.

¶32

The observation made herein before shall remain confined to the disposal of the instant petition and will have no bearing, whatsoever, on the merits of the case.

¶33

( Rakesh Kainthla) Judge

¶34

2^nd September, 2024 (saurav pathania )

Narender Singh v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Narender Singh v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghubir Singh Vs Amar Singh

Atul Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Anil Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Ritesh Kumar Vs State of Hp

Kapil Raj Sharma Vs Dharam Pal

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others