Allowed

Ravinder Kumar v. Telu Ram & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Sept 2018CRR/3752/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision petition seeking to set aside conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act, the High Court allowed the petition. Noting that the dispute was settled via mediation, compensation paid, and the petitioner was on bail, the court compounded the offence under Section 142 NI Act and reduced the sentence to the period already undergone.

What did the court decide?

Compounded the offence under Section 142 NI Act; reduced sentence to period already undergone; discharged bail bonds.

Ravinder Kumar Vs Telu Ram & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CRR-3752-2017 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRR-3752-2017 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.09.2018

Ravinder Kumar

... Petitioner

Vs.

Telu Ram and another

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

¶11

Present: Mr. Shashank Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Sarju Puri, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶13

Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, DAG, Punjab.

¶14

¶15

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (ORAL)

¶16

Prayer in this revision petition is for setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence of even date i.e. 28.05.2015 passed by the trial Court, vide which the petitioner was held guilty of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘N.I. Act’) and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 01 year and 06 months and to pay compensation equivalent to the cheque amount i.e. Rs.3.00 lacs as well as the judgment dated 17.03.2016 passed by the appellate Court, vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

¶17

On 10.10.2017, while issuing notice in the application for condonation of delay, it was recorded that the petitioner will bring a demand

¶18

VISHNU 2018.09.18 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶19

CRR-3752-2017 (O&M)

¶20

-2-

¶21

draft of Rs.3.00 lacs on the next date of hearing i.e. 25.10.2017 and thereafter, on 20.11.2017, a demand draft of Rs.3.00 lacs was handed over to learned counsel for respondent No.1-complainant and the petitioner was released on interim bail subject to furnishing his bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, SBS Nagar.

¶22

On willingness of the parties, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court for exploring the possibility of some settlement. The Mediator has given an award dated 05.02.2018 and as per this award, it is agreed between the parties that over and above the cheque amount of Rs.3.00 lacs, which was already paid to respondent No.1complainant, the petitioner will pay an additional amount of Rs.1.00 lac in two installments.

¶23

Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the aforesaid additional amount of Rs.1.00 lacs has already been paid by the petitioner to the respondent-complainant.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner thus prays that the offence may be compounded.

¶25

During the course of arguments, it transpired that the petitioner remained in custody from 26.07.2017 till 20.11.2017 i.e. approximately for a period of 04 months.

¶26

Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the petitioner has already cleared the cheque amount i.e. Rs.3.00 lacs including the additional amount of Rs.1.00 lac and the Mediator, who has given an award dated 05.02.2018, has recorded its satisfaction that the settlement between the parties is voluntarily and both the parties shall remain bound by the terms and

¶27

VISHNU 2018.09.18 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

¶28

CRR-3752-2017 (O&M)

¶29

-3-

¶30

conditions of the same.

¶31

In view of the above, instant revision petition is allowed. Offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is compounded under Section 142 of the N.I. Act and the sentence awarded by the trial Court i.e. 01 year and 06 months is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner.

¶32

Since the petitioner is on bail, his bail/surety bonds also stand discharged.

¶33

With the aforesaid modifications, present revision petition is

¶34

disposed of.

¶35

[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ] 18.09.2018 JUDGE vishnu

¶36

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

¶37

Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶38

VISHNU 2018.09.18 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

Ravinder Kumar v. Telu Ram & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravinder Kumar v. Telu Ram & Anr.

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

Karambir Vs State of Haryana

Sunil @ Sinha Vs State of Haryana

Lokesh Vs State of Haryana

Amritpal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Rajni Devi Vs State of Punjab

Harjinder Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.