CR.R/24/2018 on 31 December 2021

O R D E R

By way of instant petition filed under S.397 read with S.401 CrPC, challenge has been laid to judgment dated 22.11.2017 passed by learned Sessions Judge Kinnaur at Rampur in Cr. Appeal No. 0000044 of 2014, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.10.2014 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh in Case No. 138 NIA/0300031/2012, titled Dr. B.K. Arora vs. Pawan Bansal, whereby learned trial Court, while holding petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter, ‘Act’) convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation of Rs. 4,50,000/-.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record, are that the respondent-complainant (hereinafter, ‘complainant’) instituted a complaint under S. 138 of the Act, alleging therein that in the month of September, 2021, he, on the request of the accused advanced a sum of Rs. 4.00 Lakh to him, who with a view to discharge his aforesaid liability issued a cheque bearing No.652783 of his account maintained with State Bank of India Rampur Bushahr. However, the

fact remains that the aforesaid cheque on its presentation was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds

3. Since the accused despite having received the legal notice, failed to make the payment, complainant was compelled to institute complaint under S. 138 of the Act.

4. Learned trial Court on the basis of evidence held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced as per description given herein above.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned trial Court accused filed an appeal before leaned Sessions Judge Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr, but the same was also dismissed on 22.11.2017. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aide judgments of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned court below.

6. Vide order dated 18.1.2018, this court suspended substantive sentence imposed by learned trial Court, subject to petitioner’s depositing 15% of the compensation amount and furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/-. However, the fact remains that the aforesaid order never came to be complied with.

7. Today, during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner apprised this court with regard to factum of compromise entered into inter se parties, whereby they have resolved to settle the dispute inter se them amicably. Learned counsel for the accused sated that the cheque amount of Rs.4.00 Lakh stands paid to the complainant and as such, this court while exercising power under S.147 of the Act, may proceed to compound the offence.

8. Ms. Reena Chauhan, Advocate, appearing for the respondent, on instructions, fairly acknowledge receipt of Rs. 4.00 Lakh by the complainant and states that since entire amount of compensation has been received by the complainant, her client is not opposed to the prayer made in the instant petition for compounding of the offence. Since entire amount of compensation stands paid to the complainant, coupled with the fact that the respondent has no objection in compounding the offence, as such, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for compounding of offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act and in light of the guidelines laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction by the courts below.

9. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charges framed against him under Section 138 of the Act.

10. Petition stands disposed of in the afore terms, alongwith all pending applications. Bail bonds, if any, furnished by the accused are discharged. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge December 31, 2021 (Vikrant)