Himachal Pradesh High Court
CR.R/105/2010 on 30 December 2022
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No. 105 of 2010
Decided on: 30.12.2022 Smt. Suni Devi
.…Petitioner.
Versus
Smt.Vidyotam Sood and anr.
…Respondents.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Kulbhushan Khajuria, Advocate.
For respondent No.1 : Mr. Naresh K. Gupta, Advocate.
For respondent No.2 : Mr. Narender Thakur and Mr. Amit
Kumar Dhumal, Deputy Advocate
Generals.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)
Cr.MP No.4016/2022 & Cr.R. No. 105/2020
By way of this application, a prayer has been made to allow the composition of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Petitioner herein, was convicted for offence under Section of the Negotiable Instruments Act by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, vide judgement dated 30.09.2009, passed in
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Criminal Complaint No. 257-3/2006 filed by respondent herein. Petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Out of the compensation amount, a sum of Rs. 90,000/-was ordered to be paid to the complainant/respondent herein and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was ordered to be paid to the State of Himachal Pradesh, as litigation cost.
3. In appeal, preferred by the petitioner herein, the judgment and sentence as imposed by learned Trial Court was affirmed. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court by way of instant petition.
4. During the pendency of the petition, the matter is stated to have been settled inter se petitioner and respondent. By way of Cr.MP No. 4016 of 2022, it has been averred that a sum of Rs. 1,40,000/- has been received by respondent herein from the petitioner in full and final satisfaction of all her claims against petitioner herein. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant has submitted that the respondent/complainant has received the entire sum of Rs.1,40,000/- from the petitioner herein and now, she has no further subsisting claim against her.
5. It is no more res integra that even after conviction for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the same can be allowed to be compounded.
6. Parties have settled all their inter se disputes and respondent herein complainant has received all her dues amount from the petitioner herein. There is no legal impediment in allowing the prayer made in Cr.MP No. 4016 of 2022. Accordingly, the offence under Section of Negotiable Instruments Act, which was subject matter of trial before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla in Criminal Complaint No. 257/3 of 2006 is allowed to be compounded. The impugned order dated 17.03.2010, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla, in Case No. 94- S/10 of 2009 and affirmed judgment and sentence order dated 30.09.2009, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla in Case No. 257-3 of 2006, are quashed and set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of all charges.
7. This order, however, is subject to condition that petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.14,000/- with the H.P. State Legal Service Authority within eight weeks from today. It is clarified that in case the amount is not deposited with the H.P. State Legal Service Authority within the time allowed, this order shall stand withdrawn and conditions against petitioner shall automatically revive.
8. Petition is accordingly, disposed of.
9. For compliance, to come up on 10.04.2023.
(Satyen Vaidya) 30th December, 2022
Judge (sushma)