In a petition for suspension of sentence under Section 138 NI Act, the Court upheld the conviction but reduced the imprisonment to the period already undergone, citing full compensation payment and the death of respondents.
Sentence reduced to period already undergone; compensation portion maintained.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(101) CRR-1254-2009 Decided on: 06.07.2026
Parvinder Singh ……Petitioner
Versus
M.R.Khullar & another ..…Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI
Present:Mr.Rajesh Arora, Advocate , for the petitioner.
Mr.Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG , Haryana.
Mr.Pranav Chamoli, Ad v ocate (Legal-Aid-Counsel), Advocate, for the responde n ts.
Ramesh Chander Dimri J. (Oral) :
SAILESH RANJAN 2026.07.07 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left
CRR-1254-2009
-2-
So far as other legal representatives of the said respondent are concerned, he says that their whereabouts are not known.
and ultimately he failed to honour the said agreement because of which he issued two cheques to the respondents for a sum of Rs.54,725/- each. They also set-forth that when the said cheques were presented before the Bank concerned, the same were dishonoured for want of sufficient funds giving them a right to institute appropriate proceedings against the petitioner because of which they issued the statutory notice to him which also was not complied with and in terms of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the complaint in question was filed.
SAILESH RANJAN 2026.07.07 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left
CRR-1254-2009
-3-
“Taking the facts and circumstances of the case as well as gravity of the offence, into consideration, accused is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, and he is burdened to pay double the amount of the cheques bearing No.414396 dated 30.9.2003 for sum of Rs.54,725/- and 414397 dated 30.9.2005 for Rs.54,725/- by way of compensation, to both complainants. The period of sentence already undergone by the accused-convict, if any, be taken into consideration, while counting the period of sentence imposed upon him today. File be consigned to records after due compliance.”
judgment/order. However, his appeal was dismissed by the concerned Appellate Court on 16.04.2008. Still feeling aggrieved, he filed the present petition. In it, sentence imposed on him was suspended on 28.05.2009. He is now stated to be on bail in terms of the said suspension order.
SAILESH RANJAN 2026.07.07 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left
CRR-1254-2009
-4-
received the amount of compensation as awarded by the above-stated order dated 20.12.2006.
already made payment of the compensation awarded by the concerned Court/s and non-availability of the respondents or their legal heirs. He also states that the petitioner has already undergone a substantive sentence of 29 days in custody in the present matter.
SAILESH RANJAN 2026.07.07 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left
CRR-1254-2009
-5-
are not traceable as well as other facts/circumstances of the present case, I deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence imposed on the petitioner to the period already undergone by him in the matter in question. Ordered accordingly. However, the portion of the impugned judgment/order of sentence dated 20.12.2006 vide which compensation was awarded to the respondents, as confirmed by the Appellate Court, is maintained.
| July 6th, 2 sailesh |
026 (RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI) JUDGE |
|---|---|
| Whetherspeaking/reasoned : No |
|
| Whether Reportable : No |
SAILESH RANJAN 2026.07.07 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document bottom left
2 issues framed by the court
Whether leniency in terms of sentence reduction is warranted given the petitioner's payment of compensation and the expiry of respondents during pendency.
Whether the conviction under Section 138 NI Act stands in light of full compensation payment and untraceable legal heirs of deceased respondents.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Parvinder Singh
M.R. Khullar
Jagdish Chander
Ramesh Chander Dimri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
