Himachal Pradesh High Court
CR.R/256/2021 of HARDEEP THAKUR Vs MURKI LAL on 31 December 2021
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 31st DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR CRIMINAL REVISION No. 256 of 2021 BETWEEN: HARDEEP THAKUR, SON OF SH. SURJAN THAKUR, R/O VILLAGE SAMILIKOTSARI, P.O& TEHSIL ROHRU, DISTRICT SHIMLA,HP.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
2
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.
Arguments
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLAON THE 31[st] DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKURCRIMINAL REVISION No. 256 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
HARDEEP THAKUR, SON OF
SH. SURJAN THAKUR, R/O VILLAGE SAMILI-KOTSARI, P.O& TEHSIL ROHRU, DISTRICT SHIMLA,HP.
(BY SH. PARVEEN CHANDEL
ADVOCATE)
....PETITIONER
AND
MURKI LAL SON OF LATE SHRI SHYAM LAL R/O
VILLAGE BARARA P.O ARAHAL, TEHSIL ROHRU, DISTRICT SHIMLA,HP.
(BY MS. SHASHI KIRAN ADVOCATE
…...RESPONDENT
Whether approved for reporting?
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment, dated 30.12.2020, passed by Sessions Judge (Forest), Shimla, District Shimla,HP in Criminal Appeal No. 45-R/10 of 2019/CIS Case No.(Reg.No.)87/2019,wherebyjudgment/orderdated13.11.2019/28.11.2019, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, HP in Criminal CaseNo.RBT307-3 of 2019/18 convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to undergosimple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay compensationof Rs. 3,60,000/- to the complainant, has been affirmed.
2. Mr. Parveen Chandel, learned counsel for the petitioner,vide his separate statement, has stated that he has instructions tocommunicate that matter has been amicably settled between theparties and entire amount of compensation has been paid torespondent-complainant Murki Lal, who, in turn, has agreed towithdraw the complaint for compounding the offence. He has alsoinstructions to say that lenient view with respect to imposition ofcompounding fee be taken. Compromise has been reduced into writingand original compromise has been placed on record. He has furtherstated that his deposition is in consonance with instructions impartedto him by the petitioner.
3. Ms. Shashi Kiran, learned counsel for the respondent hasendorsed the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner and thecompromise and has communicated no objection for disposal of thepetition in terms of compromise.
4. Consequently, respondent/complainant is permitted towithdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaintarising out of dishonor of cheque, under Section 138 of the NegotiableInstruments Act, is treated to be withdrawn and judgments ofconviction and sentence passed by the Courts below are quashed andset aside. Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the accusation framedagainst him.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for exemption ofcompounding fee. It is also submitted by him that considering the ratioof law laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 as clarified by the Apex Court inMadhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. PrateekJain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690, a lenient view be taken andthe petitioner be exempted from payment of compounding fee.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances and ratio oflaw laid down by the Apex Court in aforesaid cases, instead of 15% ofthe cheque amount, petitioner/accused is directed to deposit Rs.5,000/-as compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority,Shimla within eight weeks from today.
7. After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shallplace a copy of receipt of deposit of compounding fee on record of thispetition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with theH.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla within eight weeks fromtoday, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automaticallyrevive.
8. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so alsothe pending application(s), if any.
9. Copy of this judgment be sent to H.P. State Legal ServicesAuthority, Shimla.
10. Parties are permitted to use downloaded copy from theHigh Court website for depositing the compounding fee with the H.P.Legal Services Authority, Shimla and for other purposes also.Concerned authority shall not insist for certified copy. Passing of ordermay be verified from High Court website.
31[st] December, 2021 (veena) (veena)
(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. Judge.