Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1214 (RAJ)

Santosh Devi Tibra v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-04-19

NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

body2022
JUDGMENT Narendra Singh Dhaddha, J. - By way of this criminal miscellaneous petition, petitioners pray to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 11.11.2019 passed by learned additional Sessions Judge, Women atrocities act Cases No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan in Criminal Revision No.122/2019 (CIS No.1499/2019) titled as Virendra Haldia Vs. Smt. Santosh Devi and anr. By which the revision was partly allowed against the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate (NI act, Cases) No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Revisional Court has wrongly granted interest at the rate of 9%. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have submitted bank draft of Rs.1 lac on the first date of hearing. Hon'ble apex Court in various pronouncements stated that if payment is made on the first date of hearing, then Court should have closed the proceedings in NI act Cases. Consent of the complainant is not required. So, order passed by the Revisional Court for granting interest at the rate of 9%, be set aside. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgments passed by Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Damodar S Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.; Criminal appeal No.963 of 2010 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos.6369 of 2007), decided on 03.05.2010 and M/s. Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd & anr. Vs. Kanchan Mehta; Criminal appeal No.1731 of 2017 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5451 of 2017), decided on 05.10.2017. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the Revisional Court has rightly awarded the interest at the rate of 9%. So, order of the Revisional Court does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. So, the criminal miscellaneous petition filed by the petitioners be dismissed. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent. 6. It is an admitted position that the complainant had filed a complaint against the petitioners under Section 138, NI act for dishonor of cheque of Rs.1 lac on the first date of hearing. Petitioners had submitted the draft of Rs.1 lac and learned trial Court vide order dated 09.08.2019, dropped the proceedings under Section 258 Cr.P.C. against the petitioners. 6. It is an admitted position that the complainant had filed a complaint against the petitioners under Section 138, NI act for dishonor of cheque of Rs.1 lac on the first date of hearing. Petitioners had submitted the draft of Rs.1 lac and learned trial Court vide order dated 09.08.2019, dropped the proceedings under Section 258 Cr.P.C. against the petitioners. Complainant had filed revision petition against the said order and Revisional Court had granted interest at the rate of 9% from the date of 03.01.2017 to 02.08.2019. Hon'ble apex Court in the case of M/s. Meters and Instruments Pvt. Ltd & anr. Vs. Kanchan Mehta; Criminal appeal No.1731 of 2017 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5451 of 2017) has stated that offence related to Negotiable Instrument act, 1881, Court may compound the offence even in the absence of complainant. If the Court is satisfied to the fact that the complainant has duly compensated, the Court may close the proceedings and discharge the accused. as per above pronouncements, Hon'ble apex Court clearly stated that complainant should have duly been compensated. In the present case, Revisional Court had granted the interest at the rate of 9%. 7. In my considered opinion, interest at the rate of 9% is ex-cessive, it should be 6% per annum. Order of the Rivisional Court is modified to the extent for granting interest at the rate of 9% per annum to 6% per annum from the date of 03.01.2017 to 02.08.2019. 8. accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of with the above direction.