Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1348 (KAR)

Siddaramaiah v. S. v. Narendra

2022-10-11

H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

body2022
ORDER 1. The present revision petition has been filed by the accused, challenging the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the learned XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Trial Court") in C.C.No.52341/2013, holding the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the 'N.I. Act'), which was further confirmed by the Court of the learned XXVIII Additional City Civil Judge at Mayohall Unit (CCH-29), Bangalore, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Sessions Judge's Court") in the appeal filed by him. Challenging the impugned judgments of conviction and order on sentence passed by both the Courts, the petitioner has filed the present revision petition. 2. Learned counsels from both side along with their respective clients, as identified by their learned counsels, are physically present in the Court. 3. Learned counsels from both side have filed a joint application - I.A.No.3/2022, under Section 147 of the N.I. Act, along with the affidavit of the petitioner. Both the parties have also filed a joint memo. Both in the application as well in the joint memo, the parties have reported that they have settled the matter amicably and have compromised the matter. The respondent has submitted his 'no objection' in allowing the revision petition by setting aside the impugned judgments and acquitting the petitioner of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. 4. Learned counsels for the parties also make their submission on the lines of the compromise petition. 5. The sum and substance of the joint application as well as the joint memo filed by the parties is that, the parties have settled the matter amicably, wherein the petitioner has stated that he has paid a total sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the respondent in the form of two Demand Drafts, one dated 16-07-2022 bearing No.729966 drawn in favour of the respondent, on Indian Bank, K.R. Puram Branch, Bangalore, for a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- and another Demand Draft dated 29-07-2022 bearing No.729975 drawn in favour of the respondent on Indian Bank, K.R. Puram Branch, Bangalore, for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The respondent now acknowledges the receipt of those two Demand Drafts. The respondent submits that he has received the said sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- and another Demand Draft dated 29-07-2022 bearing No.729975 drawn in favour of the respondent on Indian Bank, K.R. Puram Branch, Bangalore, for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The respondent now acknowledges the receipt of those two Demand Drafts. The respondent submits that he has received the said sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as full and final settlement of his claim which is the subject matter of the petition. 6. The enquiry made with the parties who are physically present convinces the Court that both the parties out of their free consent and volition and in their best interest have settled the matter amicably which is further corroborated by the submissions made by their learned counsels. As such, I am of the view that on the terms of the said joint application and also the joint memo filed by the parties, the parties be permitted to compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I. Act, however, subject to the payment of the graded cost by the petitioner/accused. 7. Section 147 of the N.I. Act has made every offence punishable under the N.I. Act as compoundable. As such, there is no bar for the parties in the proceeding to compound the offence. However, at the same time, the guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H reported in AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 1907 regarding imposing graded cost on litigant also to be borne in mind. According to the said Judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu's Case (supra), if the application for compounding is made before the Sessions Court or High Court in revision or appeal, such compounding is permitted to be allowed on the common condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of graded cost. 8. Admittedly, in the instant case, the cheque amount is for a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-, as such, the graded cost would be Rs. 75,000/-. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the graded cost payable by the petitioner by virtue of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra), which comes to a total sum of Rs. 75,000/- would be deposited by the petitioner. 5,00,000/-, as such, the graded cost would be Rs. 75,000/-. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the graded cost payable by the petitioner by virtue of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra), which comes to a total sum of Rs. 75,000/- would be deposited by the petitioner. Accordingly, along with the application, the petitioner has also filed a Demand Draft bearing No.730000 dated 16-09-2022, drawn on Indian Bank, K.R. Puram, Branch, Bangalore, in favour of Member Secretary, KSLSA, for a sum of Rs. 75,000/- towards graded cost as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra). The said demand draft is accepted towards the graded cost payable by the petitioner. Registry to do the needful in the matter. 10. Accordingly, taking into consideration the joint application- I.A.No.3/2022 and the joint memo filed by both side, the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra) and the circumstance of the case on hand, I.A.No.3/2022 is allowed. The parties are permitted to compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I. Act. The matter is settled as per the terms mentioned in the joint application and the joint memo filed by both side and the petitioner herein who was accused in the Trial Court in C.C.No.52341/2013 is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Accordingly, the present revision petition stands disposed of. Registry to transmit a copy of this order to both the Trial Court and also to the Sessions Judge's Court along with their respective records, immediately.