Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 3293 (PNJ)

Sarabjit Singh v. Ranjodh Singh

2023-12-02

JASJIT SINGH BEDI

body2023
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 28.04.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.11.2017 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khamanon, has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that in discharge of his legal liability, the petitioner/accused issued a cheque for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in favour of respondent No.1/complainant which came to be dishonoured. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner/accused came to be summoned under the provisions of the 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 vide order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khamanon. 3. The evidence was led and ultimately, the petitioner/accused was held guilty and accordingly, convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 01 year and compensation equivalent to the cheque amount was to be paid to the respondent No.1/complainant. 4. Aggrieved against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner/accused preferred an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, which came to be dismissed on 28.04.2023. 5. Still aggrieved, the present revision petition has been preferred by the accused. During the pendency of the present criminal revision petition, an oral compromise has been arrived at between the parties. It would be relevant to mention here that a combined reading of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act along with Section 320 Cr.P.C. would establish that where a settlement has been effected, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded on account of the fact that a mutual compromise has been effected between the parties. 6. The learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant has accepted the factum of the compromise and has stated that he has no objection if the petitioner/accused is acquitted of the charges framed against him as a sum of Rs.2,30,000/- has been received by him against the cheque amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 8. This Court in ‘Ramesh Chander Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 245’ held as under:- “4. As per the provisions of Section 147 of the Act, the offence under Section 138 is compoundable. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 8. This Court in ‘Ramesh Chander Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 245’ held as under:- “4. As per the provisions of Section 147 of the Act, the offence under Section 138 is compoundable. Section 147 reads as under:- “Offence to be compoundable- Notwithstanding anything contained in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973(2 of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable”. 5. The compounding of the offence under Section 138 can be done during the trial of the case as well as by the High Court or Court of Session while acting in the exercise of its power of revision under Section 401 Criminal Procedure Code Reference may be made to Section 320(6) Criminal Procedure Code in this regard. 6. Further, under Section 320(8) Criminal Procedure Code the composition of an offence shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded.” 9. This Court in 'Vatsa Electronics Vs. Pala Ram & Anr. decided on 09.03.2022 in CRR-1585-2019' has also held that once a settlement is being effected, then in terms of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 320 Cr.P.C., the accused ought to be acquitted as the offence stands compounded. 10. The admitted position is that the matter stands settled on the basis of an oral compromise/settlement between the parties. 11. In view of the above, since, the parties have voluntarily settled the disputes between themselves, it is a fit case for allowing them to compound the offence. 12. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed and the judgment dated 28.04.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.11.2017 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khamanon are hereby set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Petition allowed.