CR.R/208/2018 on 31 December 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No. 208 of 2018

Date of decision: 31.12.2018

Sh. Neeta Ram.

…Petitioner

Versus Sh.Ravinder Singh Chandel.

…Respondent

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Vacation Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1

For the Petitioner: Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent:

Mr.G.S. Rathore, Advocate.

Vivek Singh Thakur J. (Oral).

Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge, (Forest), Shimla, H.P. in Cr. Appeal RBT No. 46-S/10 of 2017, dated 6.6.2018, whereby judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chopal, District Shimla, dated 7.12.2016 in complaint No. 139-3 of 2014, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of `6,00,000/-, as compensation, has been affirmed.

2. Petitioner/accused, present in person in the Court, states that matter has been amicably settled with the respondent/complainant and as per compromise `2,80,000/- deposited by him in the trial Court is to be released to respondent/complainant and remaining amount of `4,20,000/- has to be paid by him in two equal installments of `2,10,000/- each, out of which first installment of `2,10,000/- shall be paid on or before 20th March, 2019 and second installment of `2,10,000/- shall be paid on or before 31st May, 2019 and in turn, respondent/complainant has agreed to withdraw the complaint and to compound the matter. Respondent/complainant, also present in person, has endorsed submissions of petitioner in his separate statement recorded on oath. Both of them stated that matter has been compromised out of free will and consent and without any pressure, threat or coercion.

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes

Cr. Revision No 208 of 2018

3. Consequently, respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising out of dishonour of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction and sentence passed by learned Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him.

4. Trial Court is directed to release `2,80,000/- along with interest, if any, in favour of the respondent/complainant Ravinder Singh Chandel, by remitting the same in his bank account, particular of which shall be supplied by the complainant/respondent, immediately on production of copy of judgment of this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a poor person, therefore, he is not in a position to pay 15% compounding fee and therefore, he prayed for exemption from payment of compounding fee relying upon judgment of the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663, as clarified in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690. In peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner/accused is directed to pay `11,000/- as compounding fee, instead of 15% of the cheque amount with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla on or before 31st May, 2019.

6. After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shall place copy of receipt of deposit on record of this petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with H.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla on or before 31st May, 2019, or on failure to make the payment of balance amount of `4,20,000/- as undertaken by him, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically revive.

Cr. Revision No 208 of 2018

7. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy of this judgment be also sent to H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla.

Copy Dasti.

(Vivek Singh Thakur), 31st December, 2018

Judge. (KRS)