1. Cheque dishonour — Complaint under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act — Conviction — Subsequent compromise between parties — Petitions for quashing of proceedings. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 1295
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ.
Omprakash Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 5427-5428 of 2024 [SLP (Crl) Nos. 15486-15487 of 2024]
Decided On : 18-12-2024
Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Namit Saxena, Avinash Kumr Singh
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Namit Saxena, Avinash Kumr Singh
Important Points
The court quashed criminal proceedings based on a compromise reached between the parties, emphasizing the importance of settlement in dishonour cases.
Subject
Criminal Law - Negotiable Instruments Act
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Dishonour of cheque - Conviction of appellant by Trial Court for dishonour of cheque amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/- with compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/- - Appeal dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge - Compromise reached between parties post-appeal - High Court dismissed revision on grounds of non-appearance of complainant and appellant - Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings based on compromise, stating High Court erred in dismissing revision without considering the settlement - Appeal allowed. (Paras 3, 5, 10, 11)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether criminal proceedings can be quashed based on a compromise and whether a High Court order in criminal revision can be annulled under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Para 6 , 8 )
3. High Court erred in dismissing the revision for non-appearance of the complainant when a compromise was filed and the complainant had received the settlement amount. (Para 10 )
4. Criminal proceedings may be quashed upon a valid settlement between parties, regardless of the complainant's physical appearance if the claim is satisfied. (Para 10 )
5. Appeal allowed — High Court order set aside — Criminal proceedings quashed — Question of law regarding Section 528 BNSS left open. (Para 11 , 12 )
6. Can criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act be quashed based on a compromise?
Yes, if the parties have entered into a settlement and the complainant has no objection to the quashing of proceedings, the court may quash the criminal proceedings. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 )
7. Is the physical presence of the complainant mandatory to verify a compromise in a criminal revision if the settlement is already on record?
Not necessarily; if a compromise is filed and the complainant is satisfied with the claim, such as by receiving the settlement amount, the court may consider the settlement without requiring the complainant's personal appearance. (Para 10 )
8. Can an order passed by the High Court in a criminal revision be annulled by exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or Section 528 BNSS based on subsequent developments?
The court disposed of the challenge to the order under Section 528 BNSS without deciding this specific issue, leaving the question of law open for determination in another appropriate case. (Para 6 , 12 )
ORDER :
1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State of Rajasthan and also learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2-complainant.
2. Leave granted.
3. The respondent no. 2 filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the appellant with respect to dishonour of cheque for an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only). The Trial Court convicted the appellant and imposed a compensation of Rs. 1,20,0000/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Thousand only) as against the cheque amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only).
4. The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 21st September, 2011. Subsequent to the dismissal of the appeal, parties entered into a compromise on 5th December, 2011 and a written Agreement was also executed duly signed by the parties.
5. The appellant preferred a revision before the High Court against the confirmation of the conviction. The High Court dismissed the criminal revision vide order dated 21.08.2023 on the ground that the complainant was not present to verify and attest the compromise arrived at between the parties and also for the reason that appellant was not personally present although his lawyer was present.
6. Appellant later on filed a petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (akin to Section 482 Cr.P.C.) for quashing of the proceedings on the basis of the compromise. The High Court has dismissed the petition under Section 528 BNSS vide order dated 22.10.2024. The High Court had framed a question to the effect that whether an order passed by the High Court in criminal revision could be annulled by exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of subsequent developments by way of a compromise entered into by the parties. The High Court had held that the Court would not have jurisdiction to do so and accordingly dismissed the petition under Section 528 BNSS.
7. Before this Court, the appellant has challenged both the orders dismissing the criminal revision as also the petition under Section 528 BNSS.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2-complainant submitted that he has already filed an affidavit and has no objection to the criminal proceedings being quashed as the settlement has been arrived at in 2011 itself.
9. Learned counsel appearing for the State of Rajasthan has also no objection to the same.
10. In view of the above, we are of the view that the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed and the High Court fell into error in dismissing the criminal revision on the ground that the complainant did not appear. The appellant had already filed the compromise before the High Court in the revision and the complainant having been satisfied with his claim, may have chosen not to appear before the High Court as he had already received the amount under the settlement.
11. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the appeal against the order dated 21st August, 2023 passed in the Criminal Revision and after setting aside the same, the entire proceedings in view of the settlement arrived at are quashed.
12. In so far as the challenge to the order passed under Section 528 BNSS is concerned, we dispose of the same, leaving the question of law open to be dealt with in another appropriate case.
13. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
